2020
DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8278(20)31356-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Individual patient data meta-analysis on controlled attenuation parameter for the XL probe in obese patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, a limitation of our study is that we did not perform a liver biopsy, which is considered the gold standard for diagnosing MASLD. Nevertheless, previous studies have shown good comparability between transient elastography and liver biopsy for MASLD diagnosis [32][33][34][35]. Another consideration is that our scoring system was developed using data from a specific subgroup of individuals with prediabetes and high cardiometabolic risk.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, a limitation of our study is that we did not perform a liver biopsy, which is considered the gold standard for diagnosing MASLD. Nevertheless, previous studies have shown good comparability between transient elastography and liver biopsy for MASLD diagnosis [32][33][34][35]. Another consideration is that our scoring system was developed using data from a specific subgroup of individuals with prediabetes and high cardiometabolic risk.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To assess the presence of any degree of steatosis (S ≥ 1), a CAP value of 274 kPa was used as the reference, which was based on the study by Eddowes PJ et al that reported a sensitivity of >90% at this cut-off [21]. We did not test other cut-offs to further distinguish between the grades of steatosis as it was repeatedly shown that the performance of the CAP for this purpose was suboptimal [21,22]. According to a recent consensus document, MASLD is defined as the presence of liver steatosis in conjunction with at least one cardiometabolic risk factor and no other discernible cause [23].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, the suboptimal performance of the ATT measurements may be a consequence of using the CAP as the reference method, which is not entirely optimal for assessing steatosis. CAP has a relatively acceptable performance for detecting any degree of steatosis (S ≥ 1), but it is not reliable enough for further differentiation between individual steatosis stages [21,22]. In this regard, we conclude that it would be necessary to evaluate this new ATT measurement method against another more reliable reference method for assessing liver steatosis, such as liver biopsy or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).…”
Section: Supplementary Materialsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) is a tool for diagnosing steatosis only available with FibroScan. However, a recent individual-patient data meta-analysis found poor diagnostic accuracies for CAP to detect steatosis, with AUROCs well below 0.80 [33]. In the subpopulation of bariatric surgery patients, diagnostic accuracies were marginally better, but remained <0.80, with sensitivities and specificities below 80% and wide confidence intervals for the optimal cut-off points.…”
Section: Ultrasound Elastography and Controlled Attenuation Parametermentioning
confidence: 97%