The Past, Present, and Future of Noninvasive Test in Chronic Liver Diseases

References

1. • Moon A.M.
   • Singal A.G.
   • Tapper E.B.
   Contemporary Epidemiology of Chronic Liver Disease and Cirrhosis.
   Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020; 18: 2650-2666
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
2. • Sepanlou S.G.
   • Safiri S.
   • Bisignano C.
   • et al.
   The global, regional, and national burden of cirrhosis by cause in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.
   Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020; 5: 245-266
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
3. • Riazi K.
   • Azhari H.
   • Charette J.H.
   • et al.
   The prevalence and incidence of NAFLD worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
   Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; 7: 851-861
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
4. • Fazel Y.
   • Koenig A.B.
   • Sayiner M.
   • et al.
   Epidemiology and natural history of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
   Metabolism. 2016; 65: 1017-1025
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
5. • Ng C.H.
   • Lim W.H.
   • Lim G.E.H.
   • et al.
   Mortality Outcomes by Fibrosis Stage in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
   Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; 0https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CGH.2022.04.014
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
6. • Yano M.
   • Kumada H.
   • Kage M.
   • et al.
   The long-term pathological evolution of chronic hepatitis C.
   Hepatology. 1996; 23: 1334-1340
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
7. • Lackner C.
   • Spindelboeck W.
   • Haybaeck J.
   • et al.
   Histological parameters and alcohol abstinence determine long-term prognosis in patients with alcoholic liver disease.
   J Hepatol. 2017; 66: 610-618
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
8. • Kim N.J.
   • Vutien P.
   • Cleveland E.
   • et al.
   Fibrosis Stage-specific Incidence of Hepatocellular Cancer After Hepatitis C Cure With Direct-acting Antivirals: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
   Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CGH.2022.04.013
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
9. • Bedossa P.
   • Dargère D.
   • Paradis V.
   Sampling Variability of Liver Fibrosis in Chronic Hepatitis C.
   Hepatology. 2003; 38: 1449-1457
   View in Article

   • Google Scholar
10. • Davison B.A.
    • Harrison S.A.
    • Cotter G.
    • et al.
    Suboptimal reliability of liver biopsy evaluation has implications for randomized clinical trials.
    J Hepatol. 2020; 73: 1322-1332
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
11. • Muthiah M.D.
    • Sanyal A.J.
    Burden of Disease due to Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
    Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2020; 49: 1-23
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
12. • Zheng Q.
    • Zou B.
    • Wu Y.
    • et al.
    Systematic review with meta-analysis: prevalence of hepatic steatosis, fibrosis and associated factors in chronic hepatitis B.
    Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2021; 54: 1100-1109
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
13. • Modaresi Esfeh J.
    • Ansari-Gilani K.
    Steatosis and hepatitis C.
    Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2015; : gov040https://doi.org/10.1093/gastro/gov040
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
14. • Asselah T.
    • Rubbia-Brandt L.
    • Marcellin P.
    • et al.
    Steatosis in chronic hepatitis C: Why does it really matter?.
    Gut. 2006; 55: 123-130
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
15. • Siphepho P.Y.
    • Liu Y.T.
    • Shabangu C.S.
    • et al.
    The impact of steatosis on chronic hepatitis c progression and response to antiviral treatments.
    Biomedicines. 2021; 9https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines9101491
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
16. • Negro F.
    Mechanisms and significance of liver steatosis in hepatitis C virus infection.
    World J Gastroenterol : WJG. 2006; 12: 6756
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
17. • Israelsen M.
    • Juel H.B.
    • Detlefsen S.
    • et al.
    Metabolic and Genetic Risk Factors Are the Strongest Predictors of Severity of Alcohol-Related Liver Fibrosis.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2020.11.038
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
18. • Bedogni G.
    • Bellentani S.
    • Miglioli L.
    • et al.
    The fatty liver index: A simple and accurate predictor of hepatic steatosis in the general population.
    BMC Gastroenterol. 2006; 6https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-230X-6-33
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
19. • Lee J.H.
    • Kim D.
    • Kim H.J.
    • et al.
    Hepatic steatosis index: A simple screening tool reflecting nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
    Dig Liver Dis. 2010; 42: 503-508
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
20. • Kotronen A.
    • Peltonen M.
    • Hakkarainen A.
    • et al.
    Prediction of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Liver Fat Using Metabolic and Genetic Factors.
    Gastroenterology. 2009; 137: 865-872
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
21. • Fedchuk L.
    • Nascimbeni F.
    • Pais R.
    • et al.
    Performance and limitations of steatosis biomarkers in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
    Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014; 40: 1209-1222
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
22. • Wanless I.R.
    • Lentz J.S.
    Fatty liver hepatitis (steatohepatitis) and obesity: an autopsy study with analysis of risk factors.
    Hepatology. 1990; 12: 1106-1110
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
23. • Xavier S.A.
    • Monteiro S.O.
    • Arieira C.M.
    • et al.
    US-FLI score – Is it possible to predict the steatosis grade with an ultrasonographic score?.
    Mol Genet Metab. 2021; 132: 204-209
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
24. • Ballestri S.
    • Lonardo A.
    • Romagnoli D.
    • et al.
    Ultrasonographic fatty liver indicator, a novel score which rules out NASH and is correlated with metabolic parameters in NAFLD.
    Liver Int. 2012; 32: 1242-1252
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
25. • Bae J.S.
    • Lee D.H.
    • Suh K.S.
    • et al.
    Noninvasive assessment of hepatic steatosis using a pathologic reference standard: comparison of CT, MRI, and US-based techniques.
    Ultrasonography. 2021; 41: 344-354
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
26. • Hannah W.N.
    • Harrison S.A.
    Noninvasive imaging methods to determine severity of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
    Hepatology. 2016; 64: 2234-2243
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
27. • de Moura Almeida A.
    • Cotrim H.P.
    • Barbosa D.B.V.
    • et al.
    Fatty liver disease in severe obese patients: Diagnostic value of abdominal ultrasound.
    World J Gastroenterol. 2008; 14: 1415-1418
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
28. • Bril F.
    • Ortiz-Lopez C.
    • Lomonaco R.
    • et al.
    Clinical value of liver ultrasound for the diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in overweight and obese patients.
    Liver Int. 2015; 35: 2139-2146
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
29. • Strauss S.
    • Gavish E.
    • Gottlieb P.
    • et al.
    Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the sonographic assessment of fatty liver.
    Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 189: 1449
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
30. • Hamaguchi M.
    • Kojima T.
    • Itoh Y.
    • et al.
    The severity of ultrasonographic findings in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease reflects the metabolic syndrome and visceral fat accumulation.
    Am J Gastroenterol. 2007; 102: 2708-2715
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
31. • Cloutier G.
    • Destrempes F.
    • Yu F.
    • et al.
    Quantitative ultrasound imaging of soft biological tissues: a primer for radiologists and medical physicists.
    Insights Imaging. 2021; 12https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01071-w
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
32. • Gao F.
    • He Q.
    • Li G.
    • et al.
    A novel quantitative ultrasound technique for identifying non-alcoholic steatohepatitis.
    Liver Int. 2022; 42: 80-91
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
33. • Karlas T.
    • Petroff D.
    • Sasso M.
    • et al.
    Individual patient data meta-analysis of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) technology for assessing steatosis.
    J Hepatol. 2017; 66: 1022-1030
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
34. • Ferraioli G.
    • Tinelli C.
    • Lissandrin R.
    • et al.
    Interobserver reproducibility of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) for quantifying liver steatosis.
    Hepatol Int. 2014; 8: 576-581
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
35. • Wong V.W.S.
    • Petta S.
    • Hiriart J.B.
    • et al.
    Validity criteria for the diagnosis of fatty liver by M probe-based controlled attenuation parameter.
    J Hepatol. 2017; 67: 577-584
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
36. • Eddowes P.J.
    • Sasso M.
    • Allison M.
    • et al.
    Accuracy of FibroScan Controlled Attenuation Parameter and Liver Stiffness Measurement in Assessing Steatosis and Fibrosis in Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
    Gastroenterology. 2019; 156: 1717-1730
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
37. • Oeda S.
    • Takahashi H.
    • Imajo K.
    • et al.
    Accuracy of liver stiffness measurement and controlled attenuation parameter using FibroScan® M/XL probes to diagnose liver fibrosis and steatosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a multicenter prospective study.
    J Gastroenterol. 2020; 55: 428-440
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
38. • Petroff D.
    • Blank V.
    • Newsome P.N.
    • et al.
    Assessment of hepatic steatosis by controlled attenuation parameter using the M and XL probes: an individual patient data meta-analysis.
    Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021; 6: 185-198
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
39. • Caussy C.
    • Alquiraish M.H.
    • Nguyen P.
    • et al.
    Optimal threshold of controlled attenuation parameter with MRI-PDFF as the gold standard for the detection of hepatic steatosis.
    Hepatology. 2018; 67: 1348-1359
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
40. • Zheng D.
    • Tian W.
    • Zheng Z.
    • et al.
    Accuracy of computed tomography for detecting hepatic steatosis in donors for liver transplantation: A meta-analysis.
    Clin Transpl. 2017; 31: e13013
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
41. • Park S.H.
    • Kim P.N.
    • Kim K.W.
    • et al.
    Macrovesicular Hepatic Steatosis in Living Liver Donors: Use of CT for Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment1.
    Radiology. 2006; 239: 105-112
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
42. • Limanond P.
    • Raman S.S.
    • Lassman C.
    • et al.
    Macrovesicular Hepatic Steatosis in Living Related Liver Donors: Correlation between CT and Histologic Findings1.
    Radiology. 2004; 230: 276-280
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
43. • Ma J.
    • Song Z.Q.
    • Yan F.H.
    Separation of Hepatic Iron and Fat by Dual-Source Dual-Energy Computed Tomography Based on Material Decomposition: An Animal Study.
    PLoS One. 2014; 9: e110964
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
44. • Fischer M.A.
    • Gnannt R.
    • Raptis D.
    • et al.
    Quantification of liver fat in the presence of iron and iodine: An ex-vivo dual-energy CT study.
    Invest Radiol. 2011; 46: 351-358
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
45. • van Werven J.R.
    • Marsman H.A.
    • Nederveen A.J.
    • et al.
    Assessment of Hepatic Steatosis in Patients Undergoing Liver Resection: Comparison of US, CT, T1-weighted Dual-Echo MR Imaging, and Point-resolved 1H MR Spectroscopy1.
    Radiology. 2010; 256: 159-168
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
46. • Tang A.
    • Desai A.
    • Hamilton G.
    • et al.
    Accuracy of MR imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction for classification of dichotomized histologic steatosis grades in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
    Radiology. 2015; 274: 416-425
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
47. • Park C.C.
    • Nguyen P.
    • Hernandez C.
    • et al.
    Magnetic Resonance Elastography vs Transient Elastography in Detection of Fibrosis and Noninvasive Measurement of Steatosis in Patients With Biopsy-Proven Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
    Gastroenterology. 2017; 152 (e2): 598-607
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
48. • Bannas P.
    • Kramer H.
    • Hernando D.
    • et al.
    Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of hepatic steatosis: Validation in ex vivo human livers.
    Hepatology. 2015; 62: 1444-1455
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
49. • Yano M.
    • Kumada H.
    • Kage M.
    • et al.
    The Long-Term Pathological Evolution of Chronic Hepatitis C.
    Hepatology. 1996; 23: 1334-1340
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
50. • Younossi Z.M.
    • Stepanova M.
    • Rafiq N.
    • et al.
    Pathologic criteria for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: Interprotocol agreement and ability to predict liver-related mortality.
    Hepatology. 2011; 53: 1874-1882
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
51. • McPherson S.
    • Stewart S.F.
    • Henderson E.
    • et al.
    Simple noninvasive fibrosis scoring systems can reliably exclude advanced fibrosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
    Gut. 2010; 59: 1265-1269
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
52. • Wong V.W.S.
    • Wong G.L.H.
    • Chim A.M.L.
    • et al.
    Validation of the NAFLD fibrosis score in a Chinese population with low prevalence of advanced fibrosis.
    Am J Gastroenterol. 2008; 103: 1682-1688
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
53. • Sterling R.K.
    • Lissen E.
    • Clumeck N.
    • et al.
    Development of a simple noninvasive index to predict significant fibrosis in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection.
    Hepatology. 2006; 43: 1317-1325
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
54. • Xiao G.
    • Zhu S.
    • Xiao X.
    • et al.
    Comparison of laboratory tests, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance elastography to detect fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A meta-analysis.
    Hepatology. 2017; 66: 1486-1501
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
55. • McPherson S.
    • Hardy T.
    • Dufour J.F.
    • et al.
    Age as a Confounding Factor for the Accurate Noninvasive Diagnosis of Advanced NAFLD Fibrosis.
    Am J Gastroenterol. 2017; 112: 740
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
56. • Mózes F.E.
    • Lee J.A.
    • Selvaraj E.A.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive tests for advanced fibrosis in patients with NAFLD: an individual patient data meta-analysis.
    Gut. 2022; 71https://doi.org/10.1136/GUTJNL-2021-324243
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
57. • Graupera I.
    • Thiele M.
    • Serra-Burriel M.
    • et al.
    Low Accuracy of FIB-4 and NAFLD Fibrosis Scores for Screening for Liver Fibrosis in the Population.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021; https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CGH.2021.12.034
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
58. • Gudowska M.
    • Gruszewska E.
    • Panasiuk A.
    • et al.
    Hyaluronic acid concentration in liver diseases.
    Clin Exp Med. 2016; 16: 523-528
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
59. • Suzuki A.
    • Angulo P.
    • Lymp J.
    • et al.
    Hyaluronic acid, an accurate serum marker for severe hepatic fibrosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
    Liver Int. 2005; 25: 779-786
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
60. • Wang Y.
    • Pan W.
    • Zhao D.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic Value of Serum Procollagen III N-Terminal Peptide for Liver Fibrosis in Infantile Cholestasis.
    Front Pediatr. 2020; 8https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2020.00131
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
61. • Nielsen M.J.
    • Nedergaard A.F.
    • Sun S.
    • et al.
    The Neo-Epitope Specific PRO-C3 ELISA Measures True Formation of Type III Collagen Associated with Liver and Muscle Parameters.
    Am J Transl Res. 2013; 5 (Available at:): 303-315
    www.ajtr.org
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
62. • Mak A.L.
    • Lee J.
    • van Dijk A.M.
    • et al.
    Systematic review with meta-analysis: Diagnostic accuracy of pro-c3 for hepatic fibrosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
    Biomedicines. 2021; 9https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines9121920
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
63. • Hemmann S.
    • Graf J.
    • Roderfeld M.
    • et al.
    Expression of MMPs and TIMPs in liver fibrosis - a systematic review with special emphasis on anti-fibrotic strategies.
    J Hepatol. 2007; 46: 955-975
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
64. • Abdelaziz R.
    • Elbasel M.
    • Esmat S.
    • et al.
    Tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinase-1 and 2 and obesity related non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: Is there a relationship?.
    Digestion. 2015; 92: 130-137
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
65. • Vali Y.
    • Lee J.
    • Boursier J.
    • et al.
    Enhanced liver fibrosis test for the noninvasive diagnosis of fibrosis in patients with NAFLD: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    J Hepatol. 2020; 73: 252-262
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
66. • Lichtinghagen R.
    • Pietsch D.
    • Bantel H.
    • et al.
    The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) score: Normal values, influence factors and proposed cut-off values.
    J Hepatol. 2013; 59: 236-242
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
67. • Younossi Z.M.
    • Felix S.
    • Jeffers T.
    • et al.
    Performance of the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis Test to Estimate Advanced Fibrosis among Patients with Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
    JAMA Netw Open. 2021; 4https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.23923
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
68. • Imbert-Bismut F.
    • Ratziu V.
    • Pieroni L.
    • et al.
    Biochemical markers of liver fibrosis in patients with hepatitis C virus infection: a prospective study.
    Lancet. 2001; 357: 1069-1075
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
69. • Ratziu V.
    • Massard J.
    • Charlotte F.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic value of biochemical markers (Fibro Test-FibroSURE) for the prediction of liver fibrosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
    BMC Gastroenterol. 2006; 6https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-230X-6-6
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
70. • Munteanu M.
    • Tiniakos D.
    • Anstee Q.
    • et al.
    Diagnostic performance of FibroTest, SteatoTest and ActiTest in patients with NAFLD using the SAF score as histological reference.
    Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2016; 44: 877-889
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
71. • Loong T.C.W.
    • Wei J.L.
    • Leung J.C.F.
    • et al.
    Application of the combined FibroMeter vibration-controlled transient elastography algorithm in Chinese patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
    J Gastroenterol Hepatol (Australia). 2017; 32: 1363-1369
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
72. • Daniels S.J.
    • Leeming D.J.
    • Eslam M.
    • et al.
    ADAPT: An Algorithm Incorporating PRO-C3 Accurately Identifies Patients With NAFLD and Advanced Fibrosis.
    Hepatology. 2019; 69: 1075-1086
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
73. • Boyle M.
    • Tiniakos D.
    • Schattenberg J.M.
    • et al.
    Performance of the PRO-C3 collagen neo-epitope biomarker in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
    JHEP Rep. 2019; 1: 188-198
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
74. • Papatheodoridi M.
    • Hiriart J.B.
    • Lupsor-Platon M.
    • et al.
    Refining the Baveno VI elastography criteria for the definition of compensated advanced chronic liver disease.
    J Hepatol. 2021; 74: 1109-1116
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
75. • Lazarus J.v.
    • Castera L.
    • Mark H.E.
    • et al.
    Real-world evidence on noninvasive tests and associated cut-offs used to assess fibrosis in routine clinical practice.
    JHEP Rep. 2022; 22: 100596
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
76. • Wong G.L.H.
    • Chan H.L.Y.
    • Choi P.C.L.
    • et al.
    Association Between Anthropometric Parameters and Measurements of Liver Stiffness by Transient Elastography.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013; 11https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2012.09.025
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
77. • Castera L.
    • Foucher J.
    • Bernard P.H.
    • et al.
    Pitfalls of liver stiffness measurement: A 5-year prospective study of 13,369 examinations.
    Hepatology. 2010; 51: 828-835
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
78. • Cassinotto C.
    • Erome Boursier J.
    • de L Edinghen V.
    • et al.
    Liver Stiffness in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Comparison of Supersonic Shear Imaging, FibroScan, and ARFI With Liver Biopsy a he study of liver diseases t american association for.
    Hepatology. 2016; 63: 1817-1827
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
79. • Zhou X.
    • Rao J.
    • Wu X.
    • et al.
    Comparison of 2-D Shear Wave Elastography and Point Shear Wave Elastography for Assessing Liver Fibrosis.
    Ultrasound Med Biol. 2021; 47: 408-427
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
80. • Imajo K.
    • Kessoku T.
    • Honda Y.
    • et al.
    Magnetic Resonance Imaging More Accurately Classifies Steatosis and Fibrosis in Patients with Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Than Transient Elastography.
    Gastroenterology. 2016; 150 (e7): 626-637
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
81. • Caussy C.
    • Chen J.
    • Alquiraish M.H.
    • et al.
    Association Between Obesity and Discordance in Fibrosis Stage Determination by Magnetic Resonance vs Transient Elastography in Patients With Nonalcoholic Liver Disease.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018; 16 (e7): 1974-1982
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
82. • Loomba R.
    • Adams L.A.
    Advances in noninvasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis.
    Gut. 2020; 69: 1343-1352
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
83. • Imajo K.
    • Honda Y.
    • Kobayashi T.
    • et al.
    Direct Comparison of US and MR Elastography for Staging Liver Fibrosis in Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; 20 (e11): 908-917
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
84. • Hsu C.
    • Caussy C.
    • Imajo K.
    • et al.
    Magnetic Resonance vs Transient Elastography Analysis of Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Individual Participants.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019; 17 (e8): 630-637
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
85. • Ekstedt M.
    • Hagström H.
    • Nasr P.
    • et al.
    Fibrosis stage is the strongest predictor for disease-specific mortality in NAFLD after up to 33 years of follow-up.
    Hepatology. 2015; 61: 1547-1554
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
86. • Gidener T.
    • Yin M.
    • Dierkhising R.A.
    • et al.
    Magnetic resonance elastography for prediction of long-term progression and outcome in chronic liver disease: A retrospective study.
    Hepatology. 2022; 75: 379-390
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
87. • Matsui N.
    • Imajo K.
    • Yoneda M.
    • et al.
    Magnetic resonance elastography increases usefulness and safety of noninvasive screening for esophageal varices.
    J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018; 33: 2022-2028
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
88. • Tamaki N.
    • Kurosaki M.
    • Higuchi M.
    • et al.
    Validation of albumin, bilirubin, and platelet criteria for avoiding screening endoscopy in patients with advanced fibrosis.
    Hepatol Res. 2020; 50: 996-999
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
89. • Unalp-Arida A.
    • Ruhl C.E.
    Noninvasive fatty liver markers predict liver disease mortality in the U.S. population.
    Hepatology. 2016; 63: 1170-1183
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
90. • Shili-Masmoudi S.
    • Wong G.L.H.
    • Hiriart J.B.
    • et al.
    Liver stiffness measurement predicts long-term survival and complications in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
    Liver Int. 2020; 40: 581-589
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
91. • Tamaki N.
    • Higuchi M.
    • Kurosaki M.
    • et al.
    Risk Difference of Liver-Related and Cardiovascular Events by Liver Fibrosis Status in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; 20 (e2): 1171-1173
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
92. • Higuchi M.
    • Tamaki N.
    • Kurosaki M.
    • et al.
    Longitudinal association of magnetic resonance elastography-associated liver stiffness with complications and mortality.
    Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2022; 55: 292-301
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
93. • Long M.T.
    • Zhang X.
    • Xu H.
    • et al.
    Hepatic Fibrosis Associates With Multiple Cardiometabolic Disease Risk Factors: The Framingham Heart Study.
    Hepatology. 2021; 73: 548-559
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
94. • Pang J.X.Q.
    • Zimmer S.
    • Niu S.
    • et al.
    Liver Stiffness by Transient Elastography Predicts Liver-Related Complications and Mortality in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease.
    PLoS One. 2014; 9https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0095776
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
95. • Cardoso C.R.L.
    • Villela-Nogueira C.A.
    • Leite N.C.
    • et al.
    Prognostic impact of liver fibrosis and steatosis by transient elastography for cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in individuals with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and type 2 diabetes: the Rio de Janeiro Cohort Study.
    Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2021; 20https://doi.org/10.1186/S12933-021-01388-2
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
96. • Hagström H.
    • Talbäck M.
    • Andreasson A.
    • et al.
    Ability of Noninvasive Scoring Systems to Identify Individuals in the Population at Risk for Severe Liver Disease.
    Gastroenterology. 2020; 158: 200-214
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
97. • Schonmann Y.
    • Yeshua H.
    • Bentov I.
    • et al.
    Liver fibrosis marker is an independent predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the general population.
    Dig Liver Dis. 2021; 53: 79-85
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
98. • Chew N.W.S.
    • Ng C.H.
    • Chan K.E.
    • et al.
    The Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) Index Predicts Cardiovascular Major Adverse Events and Mortality in Patients with Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
    Can J Cardiol. 2022; 0
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
99. • Jaruvongvanich V.
    • Wijarnpreecha K.
    • Ungprasert P.
    The utility of NAFLD fibrosis score for prediction of mortality among patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort study.
    Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2017; 41: 629-634
    View in Article

    • Google Scholar
100. • Angulo P.
     • Bugianesi E.
     • Bjornsson E.S.
     • et al.
     Simple Noninvasive Systems Predict Long-term Outcomes of Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
     Gastroenterology. 2013; 145 (e4): 782-789
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
101. • Parkes J.
     • Roderick P.
     • Harris S.
     • et al.
     Enhanced liver fibrosis test can predict clinical outcomes in patients with chronic liver disease.
     Gut. 2010; 59: 1245-1251
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
102. • Kamath P.S.
     • Mookerjee R.P.
     Expanding consensus in portal hypertension: Report of the Baveno VI Consensus Workshop: Stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension.
     J Hepatol. 2015; 63: 743-752
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
103. • de Franchis R.
     • Bosch J.
     • Garcia-Tsao G.
     • et al.
     Baveno VII – Renewing consensus in portal hypertension.
     J Hepatol. 2022; 76: 959-974
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
104. • Castéra L.
     • García-Tsao G.
     When the spleen gets tough, the varices get going.
     Gastroenterology. 2013; 144: 19-22
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
105. • Hong W.K.
     • Kim M.Y.
     • Baik S.K.
     • et al.
     The usefulness of noninvasive liver stiffness measurements in predicting clinically significant portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients: Korean data.
     Clin Mol Hepatol. 2013; 19: 370
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
106. • Reiberger T.
     The Value of Liver and Spleen Stiffness for Evaluation of Portal Hypertension in Compensated Cirrhosis.
     Hepatol Commun. 2022; 6: 950-964
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
107. • Berzigotti A.
     • Tsochatzis E.
     • Boursier J.
     • et al.
     EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on noninvasive tests for evaluation of liver disease severity and prognosis – 2021 update.
     J Hepatol. 2021; 75: 659-689
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
108. • Stafylidou M.
     • Paschos P.
     • Katsoula A.
     • et al.
     Performance of Baveno VI and Expanded Baveno VI Criteria for Excluding High-Risk Varices in Patients With Chronic Liver Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
     Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019; 17 (e11): 1744-1755
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
109. • Szakács Z.
     • Erőss B.
     • Soós A.
     • et al.
     Baveno criteria safely identify patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease who can avoid variceal screening endoscopy: A diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis.
     Front Physiol. 2019; 10: 1028
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
110. • You M.W.
     • Kim K.W.
     • Pyo J.
     • et al.
     A Meta-analysis for the Diagnostic Performance of Transient Elastography for Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension.
     Ultrasound Med Biol. 2017; 43: 59-68
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
111. • Podrug K.
     • Trkulja V.
     • Zelenika M.
     • et al.
     Validation of the New Diagnostic Criteria for Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension by Platelets and Elastography.
     Dig Dis Sci. 2022; 67: 3327
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
112. • Kanwal F.
     • Shubrook J.H.
     • Adams L.A.
     • et al.
     Clinical Care Pathway for the Risk Stratification and Management of Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.
     Gastroenterology. 2021; 161: 1657-1669
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
113. • Cusi K.
     • Isaacs S.
     • Barb D.
     • et al.
     American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Primary Care and Endocrinology Clinical Settings: Co-Sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD).
     Endocr Pract. 2022; 28: 528-562
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
114. • De A.
     • Duseja A.
     • Mehta M.
     • et al.
     AGILE 3+ Score for Assessing Hepatic Fibrosis in Patients with Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) – Validation in an Indian Cohort.
     J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2022; 12: S65
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
115. • Pennisi G.
     • Enea M.
     • Pandolfo A.
     • et al.
     AGILE 3+ Score for the Diagnosis of Advanced Fibrosis and for Predicting Liver-related Events in NAFLD.
     Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CGH.2022.06.013
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
116. • Newsome P.N.
     • Sasso M.
     • Deeks J.J.
     • et al.
     FibroScan-AST (FAST) score for the noninvasive identification of patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis with significant activity and fibrosis: a prospective derivation and global validation study.
     Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020; 5: 362
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
117. • Woreta T.A.
     • van Natta M.L.
     • Lazo M.
     • et al.
     Validation of the accuracy of the FAST^TM score for detecting patients with at-risk nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) in a North American cohort and comparison to other noninvasive algorithms.
     PLoS One. 2022; 17: e0266859
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
118. • Noureddin M.
     • Truong E.
     • Gornbein J.A.
     • et al.
     MRI-based (MAST) score accurately identifies patients with NASH and significant fibrosis.
     J Hepatol. 2022; 76: 781-787
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
119. • Jung J.
     • Loomba R.R.
     • Imajo K.
     • et al.
     MRE combined with FIB-4 (MEFIB) Index in detection of candidates for pharmacologic treatment of NASH related fibrosis.
     Gut. 2021; 70: 1946
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
120. • Ajmera V.
     • Kim B.K.
     • Yang K.
     • et al.
     Liver Stiffness on Magnetic Resonance Elastography and the MEFIB Index and Liver-Related Outcomes in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Participants.
     Gastroenterology. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1053/J.GASTRO.2022.06.073
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
121. • Kim B.K.
     • Tamaki N.
     • Imajo K.
     • et al.
     Head to head comparison between MEFIB, MAST, and FAST for detecting stage 2 fibrosis or higher among patients with NAFLD.
     J Hepatol. 2022; 13https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHEP.2022.07.020
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
122. • Vutien P.
     • Berry K.
     • Feng Z.
     • et al.
     Combining FIB-4 and liver stiffness into the FIB-5, a single model that accurately predicts complications of portal hypertension.
     Am J Gastroenterol. 2022; https://doi.org/10.14309/AJG.0000000000001906
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
123. • Terrault N.A.
     • Lok A.S.F.
     • McMahon B.J.
     • et al.
     Update on Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment and of Chronic Hepatitis B: AASLD 2018 Hepatitis B Guidance.
     Hepatology. 2018; 67: 1560
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
124. • Ghany M.G.
     • Morgan T.R.
     Hepatitis C Guidance 2019 Update: American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases–Infectious Diseases Society of America Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection.
     Hepatology. 2020; 71: 686-721
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
125. • Pawlotsky J.M.
     • Negro F.
     • Aghemo A.
     • et al.
     EASL recommendations on treatment of hepatitis C: Final update of the series.
     J Hepatol. 2020; 73: 1170-1218
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
126. • Lampertico P.
     • Agarwal K.
     • Berg T.
     • et al.
     EASL 2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of hepatitis B virus infection.
     J Hepatol. 2017; 67: 370-398
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
127. • Ioannou G.N.
     HCC surveillance after SVR in patients with F3/F4 fibrosis.
     J Hepatol. 2021; 74: 458-465
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
128. • Carrat F.
     • Fontaine H.
     • Dorival C.
     • et al.
     Clinical outcomes in patients with chronic hepatitis C after direct-acting antiviral treatment: a prospective cohort study.
     The Lancet. 2019; 393: 1453-1464
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
129. • D’Ambrosio R.
     • Degasperi E.
     • Anolli M.P.
     • et al.
     Incidence of liver- and non-liver-related outcomes in patients with HCV-cirrhosis after SVR.
     J Hepatol. 2022; 76: 302-310
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
130. • D’Ambrosio R.
     • Aghemo A.
     • Rumi M.G.
     • et al.
     A morphometric and immunohistochemical study to assess the benefit of a sustained virological response in hepatitis C virus patients with cirrhosis.
     Hepatology. 2012; 56: 532-543
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
131. • Semmler G.
     • Binter T.
     • Kozbial K.
     • et al.
     Noninvasive Risk Stratification After HCV Eradication in Patients With Advanced Chronic Liver Disease.
     Hepatology. 2021; 73: 1275-1289
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
132. • Semmler G.
     • Lens S.
     • Meyer E.L.
     • et al.
     Noninvasive tests for clinically significant portal hypertension after HCV cure.
     J Hepatol. 2022; 0https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHEP.2022.08.025
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
133. • Dulai P.S.
     • Singh S.
     • Patel J.
     • et al.
     Increased risk of mortality by fibrosis stage in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
     Hepatology. 2017; 65: 1557-1565
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
134. • Loomba R.
     • Ratziu V.
     • Harrison S.A.
     • et al.
     Expert Panel Review to Compare FDA and EMA Guidance on Drug Development and Endpoints in Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis.
     Gastroenterology. 2022; 162: 680-688
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
135. Noncirrhotic Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis With Liver Fibrosis: Developing Drugs for Treatment | FDA.
     (Available at:)
     https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/noncirrhotic-nonalcoholic-steatohepatitis-liver-fibrosis-developing-drugs-treatment
     (Accessed August 21, 2022)
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
136. Draft reflection paper on regulatory requirements for the development of medicinal products for chronic non-infectious liver diseases (PBC, PSC, NASH) | European Medicines Agency.
     (Available at:)
     https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/draft-reflection-paper-regulatory-requirements-development-medicinal-products-chronic-non-infectious
     (Accessed August 21, 2022)
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
137. • Nakajima A.
     • Eguchi Y.
     • Yoneda M.
     • et al.
     Randomised clinical trial: Pemafibrate, a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α modulator (SPPARMα), versus placebo in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
     Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2021; 54: 1263
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
138. • Flint A.
     • Andersen G.
     • Hockings P.
     • et al.
     Randomised clinical trial: semaglutide versus placebo reduced liver steatosis but not liver stiffness in subjects with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease assessed by magnetic resonance imaging.
     Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2021; 54: 1150
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
139. • Tamaki N.
     • Munaganuru N.
     • Jung J.
     • et al.
     Clinical utility of 30% relative decline in MRI-PDFF in predicting fibrosis regression in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
     Gut. 2022; 71: 983-990
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar
140. • Stine J.G.
     • Munaganuru N.
     • Barnard A.
     • et al.
     Change in MRI-PDFF and Histologic Response in Patients With Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
     Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021; 19 (e5): 2274-2283
     View in Article

     • Google Scholar