ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology2026
Accuracy of non-invasive tests for diagnosing liver fibrosis and steatosis: A systematic review.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver fibrosis is a key determinant of prognosis and management in chronic liver diseases. Although liver biopsy is considered the gold standard for fibrosis assessment, its invasiveness, sampling variability, and associated risks have prompted increasing reliance on non-invasive tests. This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic accuracy and clinical applicability of non-invasive modalities for diagnosing liver fibrosis in adult patients with chronic liver diseases.
aimTo systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, clinical utility, and applicability of non-invasive tests for detecting and staging liver fibrosis in adult patients with chronic liver diseases, using liver biopsy as the reference standard.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted using predefined search terms combining liver fibrosis, chronic liver disease, non-invasive diagnostic tests, and diagnostic accuracy measures, with liver biopsy as the reference standard. Studies were selected based on a PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) framework including adults (≥ 18 years) with chronic liver diseases such as hepatitis B, hepatitis C, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and alcohol-related liver disease. Eligible interventions included serum biomarkers (
resultsThe included studies comprised prospective and retrospective cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, and cross-sectional studies. Elastography-based techniques consistently demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy for detecting significant and advanced fibrosis across multiple chronic liver disease etiologies. Serum biomarker panels showed variable performance but were effective as first-line screening tools due to their accessibility and cost-effectiveness. Heterogeneity was observed in study design, fibrosis staging systems, and cut-off values.
conclusionNon-invasive tests represent reliable and clinically applicable alternatives to liver biopsy for fibrosis assessment in chronic liver diseases. Elastography-based modalities, particularly transient elastography and two-dimensional shear wave elastography, demonstrated consistently high diagnostic accuracy for advanced fibrosis across included studies. Serum biomarker panels such as fibrosis-4 index and enhanced liver fibrosis showed variable performance but are effective as first-line screening tools due to their accessibility and cost-effectiveness. A sequential diagnostic approach integrating serum biomarkers followed by imaging modalities improves overall diagnostic accuracy and reduces the need for invasive procedures. However, significant heterogeneity in study design, patient populations, and cut-off values limits standardization and highlights the need for larger multicentric validation studies.
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.