ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2024
Assessing hepatic steatosis by magnetic resonance in potential living liver donors
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of hepatic iron quantification by MRI between 1.5 and 3 T, using different methods and conversion formulas.European radiology · 2026Article
- Noninvasive Assessment of Hepatic Steatosis in Living Liver Donors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparative Efficacy of NAFLD Therapies and Biomarker Associations: A Meta-Analysis Based on Liver Fat Content.Gastro hep advances · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) measurements for detecting liver fat content in potential living liver donors and to compare these results using liver biopsy findings.
methodsA total of 139 living liver donors (men/women: 83/56) who underwent MRI between January 2017 and September 2021 were included in this analysis retrospectively. The PDFFs were measured using both MR spectroscopy (MRS) and chemical shift-based MRI (CS-MRI) for each donor in a blinded manner.
resultsSignificant positive correlations were found between liver biopsy and MRS-PDFF and CS-MRI PDFF in terms of hepatic steatosis detection [r = 0.701, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.604–0.798, r = 0.654, 95% CI: 0.544–0.765,
conclusionThe methods of MRS-PDFF and CS-MRI PDFF provide a non-invasive and accurate approach for assessing hepatic steatosis in potential living liver donor candidates. These MRI PDFF techniques present a promising clinical advantage in the preoperative evaluation of living liver donors by eliminating the requirement for invasive procedures like liver biopsy.
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.