ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2025
Discovery of ultrasound-derived fat fraction as a non-invasive tool for MASLD diagnosis.
Article in European journal of medical research, 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.
- Comparing ultrasound-derived fat fraction and CT for diagnosing hepatic steatosis: an MRI-PDFF reference study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Multiparametric Quantitative Ultrasound for Hepatic Steatosis: Comparison with CAP and Robustness Across Breathing States.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ultrasound-derived fat fraction (UDFF) for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), by directly comparing it with the non-invasive gold standard MRI-PDFF and the established ultrasound method CAP.
methodsThe diagnostic criteria for MASLD were used, we included 103 individuals with 53 MASLD patients and 49 healthy controls. All participants underwent liver MRI for MRI-PDFF quantification; ultrasound elastography for UDFF measurement; and vibration-controlled transient elastography for CAP assessment. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to evaluate the performance of UDFF and CAP for predicting MRI-PDFF ≥ 5%, the imaging threshold defining hepatic steatosis in MASLD diagnosis. Finally, we analyzed the correlation between UDFF and serological indicators and the consistency between UDFF and MRI-PDFF.
resultsAcross all 103 participants, the median UDFF value was 6.0%, median CAP was 246 dB/m, and median MRI-PDFF was 5.44%. Overall, UDFF was positively correlated with MRI-PDFF (R = 0.876; P < 0.001), and CAP was positively correlated with MRI-PDFF (R = 0.792, P < 0.001). For diagnosing 5% and above MRI-PDFF, UDFF was noted to have a mean AUC of 0.981. Additionally, CAP was noted to have an AUC of 0.932 in diagnosing MASLD. In addition, the Bland-Altman difference plots showed overall UDFF and MRI-PDFF, with a mean deviation of -0.2%. A linear regression model between the difference and the mean suggested proportional error.
conclusionsUltrasound testing for UDFF provides a simple and noninvasive clinical tool to quantify the extent of hepatic steatosis. The diagnostic efficacy of UDFF is superior to CAP. Notably, while UDFF shows strong agreement with MRI-PDFF overall, Bland-Altman analysis revealed a proportional bias, with UDFF tending to underestimate MRI-PDFF at higher fat content levels. Despite this limitation, UDFF demonstrates potential as a noninvasive alternative to MRI-PDFF for MASLD diagnosis.
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.