ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Ultrasound hepatorenal index for the diagnosis of steatosis in patients with type 2 diabetes: a prospective validation study.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Comparison of ultrasound-derived fat fraction and hepatorenal index for quantitative detection of hepatic steatosis: a multicenter MRI-PDFF-referenced study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the performance of the ultrasound hepatorenal index (US-HRI) for the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis in patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), using MRI proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) as reference. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis two-center prospective study included 129 and 263 patients in the training and validation cohorts, respectively, between 2019 and 2022. Hepatic steatosis was classified according to MRI-PDFF as S0 (≤ 6.5%), S1 (6.5-16.5%), S2 (16.5-22%), and S3 (> 22%). Obuchowski measurement (OB) was performed to assess the diagnostic performance of US-HRI in the whole cohort. Optimal cut-offs of US-HRI for diagnosing ≥ S1 and ≥ S2 were identified in the training cohort by maximizing the Youden index and were applied in the validation cohort.
resultsOverall, 392 patients were included (mean age, 59 years ± 9.5; 235 men). The OB (four class problem S0 to S3) was 0.79 ± 0.01. Pairwise accuracy was good for S0 vs S1, S2 or S3 (0.78 to 0.89) but decreased for distinguishing among higher grades (0.54 to 0.62). Optimal US-HRI threshold for diagnosing ≥ S1 was 1.16, with a sensitivity of 82.7% (95% CI: 77.4-87.3), specificity of 80.0% (95% CI: 56.3-94.3), and AUC of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86). The threshold for diagnosing ≥ S2 was 1.47, with a sensitivity of 49.0% (95% CI: 39.1-59.0), specificity of 73.0% (95% CI: 65.3-79.7), and AUC of 0.61 (95% CI: 0.55-0.67).
conclusionUS-HRI was a reliable tool for diagnosing steatosis in type 2 diabetic patients with MASLD. However, its performance in assessing more severe grades of steatosis was inadequate. KEY POINTS: Question Ultrasound hepatorenal index (US-HRI) performance for the diagnosis of steatosis in type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is not well defined. Findings US-HRI demonstrated good diagnostic performance for steatosis (S0 vs S1-S3), but this decreased for diagnosing S2-S3. Clinical relevance US-HRI provides a quantitative approach for detecting hepatic steatosis in patients with MASLD and type 2 diabetes, but has shown limited effectiveness in grading higher grades.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40560415What 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.