Evidence Hub

Comparison of magnetic resonance elastography and transient elastography in the diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Junying Bi, Liangjin Liu, Tao Qin

Annals of Palliative Medicine, 2021

12 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few studies comprehensively compared the performance of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) and transient elastography (TE) in the diagnosis of liver fibrosis. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the diagnostic efficacy of these 2 techniques in patients with hepatic fibrosis in order to gain a better understanding of their overall diagnostic performance and aid in maximizing their clinical utility. METHODS: Systematic literature searches of the PubMed, EmBase, Cocharane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were carried out to identify studies that applied MRE and TE in the diagnosis of liver fibrosis. The combined sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio (ORs) were estimated using a bivariate random effects model. Review Manager 5.2 was used to analyze the selected articles, and forest plot, sensitivity, and bias analyses were performed for the included literature. To determine the diagnostic efficacy of MRE and TE for liver fibrosis, pooled sensitivity and specificity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. In the diagnosis of stage F0-F1 liver fibrosis, MRE showed higher sensitivity than TE (OR =0.62, 95% CI: 0.41-0.95, P=0.03). MRE also showed higher specificity than TE for diagnosing stage F2-F4 liver fibrosis (OR =0.41, 95% CI: 0.27-0.62, P<0.0001). There was no difference in the sensitivity of MRE and Te to F2-F4…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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