Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32857259›Full record

ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2020

Magnetic Resonance imaging analysis of liver fibrosis and inflammation: overwhelming gray zones restrict clinical use.

D Marti-Aguado, A Rodríguez-Ortega, A Alberich-Bayarri, L Marti-Bonmati

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Quantification ofJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Secondary Iron Overload and the Liver: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

D Marti-AguadoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4266-6076
A Rodríguez-OrtegaBiomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230 and PREBI), and Imaging La Fe Node at Distributed Network for Biomedical Imaging (ReDIB) Unique Scientific and Technical Infrastructures (ICTS), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain.
A Alberich-BayarriBiomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230 and PREBI), and Imaging La Fe Node at Distributed Network for Biomedical Imaging (ReDIB) Unique Scientific and Technical Infrastructures (ICTS), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5932-2392
L Marti-BonmatiBiomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230 and PREBI), and Imaging La Fe Node at Distributed Network for Biomedical Imaging (ReDIB) Unique Scientific and Technical Infrastructures (ICTS), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain. marti_lui@gva.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8234-010X
Center For Biomarker Research In Medicine · ATHospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe · ESINCLIVA Health Research Institute · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance (MR) identification and grading of subjects with liver fibrosis and inflammation represents a clinical challenge. MR elastography plays a well-defined role in fibrosis estimation, but its use is not widely available in clinical settings. Given that liver MR is becoming the reference standard for fat and iron quantitation, there is a need to clarify whether there is any role for MR imaging in the concomitant evaluation of fibrosis and inflammation in this setting. This review summarizes the diagnostic estimations of different MR imaging parameters obtained from conventional non-contrast-enhanced multiple b values diffusion-weighted acquisitions, variable flip angles T1 relaxation maps and STIR images. Although some derived parameters have shown a significant correlation to histological scores, a small magnitude of effect with wide overlap across severity grades is the rule. Contrary to fat and iron quantification, the low precision and reproducibility of MR imaging metrics limits its clinical relevance in fibrosis and inflammation assessment. In a sequential clinical approach combining different methodologies, MR imaging has no applicability for ruling-out and low accuracy for ruling-in advanced fibrosis. Thereby, MR elastography remains as the only image method with high diagnostic accuracy for the detection of advanced fibrosis. Until date, inflammation remains in a gray zone where biopsy cannot be replaced, and further investigations are needed. The present review offers an in-depth discuss of the MR imaging diagnostic performance for the evaluation of liver fibrosis and inflammation, highlighting the need for scientific improvements.

Indexed as

Elasticity Imaging TechniquesLiver CirrhosisHumansInflammationLiverMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of ResultsChronic liver disease (CLD)Diffusion-weighted imagingInflammationLiver fibrosisMagnetic resonance (MR)Short-TI inversion recovery STIR sequenceT1 relaxometry (mapping)

Identifiers

PMID32857259
OpenAlexW3082545661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.