ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Magnetic resonance elastography combined with fibrosis-4 index for diagnosing at-risk metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score ≥4) and significant fibrosis (≥F2; at-risk MASH) are at increased risk for disease progression. Magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) combined with the fibrosis-4 (MEFIB) index enables the noninvasive diagnosis of at-risk MASH and significant fibrosis. We assessed the performance of the MEFIB index for ruling in/out both target conditions. Methods: We analyzed studies up to February 2025 assessing the performance of MEFIB index for ruling in (MRE≥3.3 kPa plus FIB-4≥1.6) and out (MRE<3.3 kPa plus FIB-4<1.6) at-risk MASH or significant fibrosis, using liver biopsy as the reference standard. We calculated pooled diagnostic accuracy estimates using bivariate random-effects models. Results: We included 7 studies with 3356 participants. For ruling in at-risk MASH, the MEFIB index yielded a pooled specificity of 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.99), and a positive likelihood ratio (LRp) of 5.3 (95%CI 1.8-15.7). For ruling out at-risk MASH, the MEFIB index had a pooled sensitivity of 0.77 (95%CI 0.62-0.88) and a negative likelihood ratio (LRn) of 0.34 (95%CI 0.23-0.52). For ruling in significant fibrosis, the MEFIB index achieved a summary specificity of 0.93 (95%CI 0.85-0.97) with LRp 8.2 (95%CI 4.5-14.9). For excluding significant fibrosis, the pooled sensitivity and LRn of the MEFIB index were 0.88 (95%CI 0.79-0.94) and 0.16 (95%CI 0.08-0.31), respectively. Conclusions: MEFIB index has acceptable accuracy for diagnosing at-risk MASH and significant fibrosis. Proposed thresholds can be used to identify both target conditions in high prevalence settings and facilitate patient recruitment in clinical trials.
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.