Evidence Hub

Diagnostic accuracy of FibroScan-AST (FAST) score for the non-invasive identification of patients with fibrotic non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

F. Ravaioli, E. Dajti, A. Mantovani, P. Newsome, G. Targher, A. Colecchia

Gut, 2023

5,835 participants · 81 citations

Abstract

Objective A simple combined score with liver stiffness, controlled attenuation parameter and serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST), the FibroScan-AST (FAST) score, has been proposed to non-invasively identify patients with fibrotic non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to evaluate the overall diagnostic accuracy of the FAST score in identifying patients with fibrotic NASH. Design We systematically searched MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library electronic databases for full-text published articles in any language between 3 February 2020 and 30 April 2022. We included original articles that reported data for the calculation of sensitivity and specificity of the FAST score for identifying adult patients with fibrotic NASH adults, according to previously described rule-out (≤0.35) and rule-in (≥0.67) cut-offs. Results We included 12 observational studies for a total of 5835 participants with biopsy-confirmed non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. The pooled prevalence of fibrotic NASH was 28% (95% CI 21% to 34%). The FAST score’s pooled sensitivity was 89% (95% CI 82% to 93%), and the pooled specificity was 89% (95% CI 83% to 94%) according to the aforementioned rule-in/rule-out cut-offs. The negative predictive value and positive predictive value of the FAST score were 92% (95% CI 91% to 95%) and 65% (95% CI 53% to 68%), respectively. Subgroup analyses and influential bias analyses did not alter…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 5,835 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free