Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31132814›Full record

SynthesisKorean journal of radiology2019

Technical Performance of Two-Dimensional Shear Wave Elastography for Measuring Liver Stiffness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Dong Wook Kim, Chong Hyun Suh, Kyung Won Kim, Junhee Pyo, Chan Park, Seung Chai Jung

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Korean journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Diabetes and obesity reduce FIB-4 accuracy in MASLD referral pathways.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Shear wave elastography as a non-invasive tool for staging liver fibrosis in children: A study in Algerian pediatric patients.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Dong Wook Kim *Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-7887-657X
Chong Hyun Suh *Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4737-0530
Kyung Won KimDepartment of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. medimash@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-1532-5970
Junhee PyoWHO Collaborating Center for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Department of Pharmaceutical Science, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2807-1340
Chan ParkDepartment of Radiology, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9838-8757
Seung Chai JungDepartment of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5559-7973

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the technical performance of two-dimensional shear wave elastography (2D-SWE) for measuring liver stiffness. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe Ovid-MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for studies reporting the technical performance of 2D-SWE, including concerns with technical failures, unreliable measurements, interobserver reliability, and/or intraobserver reliability, published until June 30, 2018. The pooled proportion of technical failure and unreliable measurements was calculated using meta-analytic pooling via the random-effects model and inverse variance method for calculating weights. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore potential causes of heterogeneity. The pooled intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for interobserver and intraobserver reliability were calculated using the Hedges-Olkin method with Fisher's Z transformation of the correlation coefficient.

resultsThe search yielded 34 articles. From 20 2D-SWE studies including 6196 patients, the pooled proportion of technical failure was 2.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-3.9%). The pooled proportion of unreliable measurements from 20 studies including 6961 patients was 7.5% (95% CI, 4.7-11.7%). In the subgroup analyses, studies conducting more than three measurements showed fewer unreliable measurements than did those with three measurements or less, but no intergroup difference was found in technical failure. The pooled ICCs for interobserver reliability (from 10 studies including 517 patients) and intraobserver reliability (from 7 studies including 679 patients) were 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82-0.90) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.95), respectively, suggesting good to excellent reliability.

conclusion2D-SWE shows good technical performance for assessing liver stiffness, with high technical success and reliability. Future studies should establish the quality criteria and optimal number of measurements.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overDatabases, FactualElasticity Imaging TechniquesFemaleHumansLiverLiver CirrhosisMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignYoung AdultElasticity imaging techniquesLiverMeta-analysisUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID31132814
PMCPMC6536798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.