ArticleJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2024
Marked difference in liver fat measured by histology
Article in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of ultrasound attenuation imaging in detecting hepatic steatosis.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2026Pooled it
- Liver Fat Quantification and Steatosis Grading in Fatty Liver Disease by Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of MRI proton density fat fraction in hepatic steatosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- EASL-EASD-EASO Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD).Obesity facts · 2024Guideline
- Screening and diagnosis of liver disease in diabetes: a guide and evidence-based assessment.Diabetologia · 2026Review
- MRI in MASLD: technical foundations and guideline-based applications.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Performance of Ultrasound-Guided Attenuation Parameter (UGAP) for Hepatic Steatosis Assessment: Comparison with MRI-PDFF and Evaluation of Cohort-Derived Thresholds.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Spatial characterization of intrahepatic fat deposition across steatotic liver disease subcategories: a multicenter study.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Physiological foundation modeling for subclinical disease assessment: a prospective pilot.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Digital pathology and lipid droplet size as a key determinant of discrepancies between histology and MRI gradings in steatotic liver disease.European radiology · 2026Article
- Impact of hepatic vessels on whole liver proton density fat fraction and R2* quantification.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of ultrasound-derived fat fraction for assessing steatotic liver disease with histopathology as the reference.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2026Article
- Impact of long-term fasting on liver and abdominal adipose tissues monitored by quantitative chemical-shift encoded MRI.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Standardized evaluation protocols for deceased and living liver donors: a practical framework for emerging liver transplant programs.Frontiers in transplantation · 2026Review
- Assessment of hepatic steatosis during rat liver regeneration after 70% partial hepatectomy using stereology and MRI-PDFF.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An Invisible Early Steatosis Phenotype Defined for a Large Population-Based Cohort.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Can Clinical Biomarkers Guide Optimal Therapeutic Selection in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus? A Scoping Review.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Article
- The role of adipose tissue in liver fat accumulation: a sex-specific analysis in an exploratory cross-sectional study.Lipids in health and disease · 2025Article
- Mildly elevated liver lipid content is characterised by reduced insulin sensitivity.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2025Article
- Ultrasound-derived fat fraction for the noninvasive quantification of hepatic steatosis: a prospective multicenter study.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 10 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background & Aims: Pathologists quantify liver steatosis as the fraction of lipid droplet-containing hepatocytes out of all hepatocytes, whereas the magnetic resonance-determined proton density fat fraction (PDFF) reflects the tissue triacylglycerol concentration. We investigated the linearity, agreement, and correspondence thresholds between histological steatosis and PDFF across the full clinical spectrum of liver fat content associated with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Methods: Using individual patient-level measurements, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing histological steatosis with PDFF determined by magnetic resonance spectroscopy or imaging in adults with suspected non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Linearity was assessed by meta-analysis of correlation coefficients and by linear mixed modelling of pooled data, agreement by Bland-Altman analysis, and thresholds by receiver operating characteristic analysis. To explain observed differences between the methods, we used RNA-seq to determine the fraction of hepatocytes in human liver biopsies. Results: Eligible studies numbered 9 (N = 597). The relationship between PDFF and histology was predominantly linear (r = 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.89]), and their values approximately coincided at 5% steatosis. Above 5% and towards higher levels of steatosis, absolute values of the methods diverged markedly, with histology exceeding PDFF by up to 3.4-fold. On average, 100% histological steatosis corresponded to a PDFF of 33.0% (29.5-36.7%). Targeting at a specificity of 90%, optimal PDFF thresholds to predict histological steatosis grades were ≥5.75% for ≥S1, ≥15.50% for ≥S2, and ≥21.35% for S3. Hepatocytes comprised 58 ± 5% of liver cells, which may partly explain the lower values of PDFF Conclusions: Histological steatosis and PDFF have non-perfect linearity and fundamentally different scales of measurement. Liver fat values obtained using these methods may be rendered comparable by conversion equations or threshold values. Impact and implications: Magnetic resonance-proton density fat fraction (PDFF) is increasingly being used to measure liver fat in place of the invasive liver biopsy. Understanding the relationship between PDFF and histological steatosis fraction is important for preventing misjudgement of clinical status or treatment effects in patient care. Our analysis revealed that histological steatosis fraction is often significantly higher than PDFF, and their association varies across the spectrum of fatty liver severity. These findings are particularly important for physicians and clinical researchers, who may use these data to interpret PDFF measurements in the context of histologically evaluated liver fat content.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.