FibroScan-AST score for diagnosing fibrotic MASH: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Konstantinos Malandris, Dimitrios Arampidis, Maria Mainou, Nikolaos Papadopoulos, Thomas Karagiannis, Tarek Nayfeh, Aris Liakos, Emmanouil Sinakos, Apostolos Tsapas, Eleni Bekiari
{"title":"FibroScan-AST score for diagnosing fibrotic MASH: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.","authors":"Konstantinos Malandris, Dimitrios Arampidis, Maria Mainou, Nikolaos Papadopoulos, Thomas Karagiannis, Tarek Nayfeh, Aris Liakos, Emmanouil Sinakos, Apostolos Tsapas, Eleni Bekiari","doi":"10.1111/jgh.16770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Following the approval of the first agent for the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), identification of patients with fibrotic MASH (MASH with NAS ≥ 4 and fibrosis stage ≥ 2) is crucial. We assessed the performance of FibroScan-aspartate aminotransferase (AST) score (FAST) for ruling in/out fibrotic MASH.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, and gray literature sources up to January 11, 2024. Studies were eligible if they assessed the accuracy of FAST score for the detection of fibrotic MASH using biopsy as the reference standard at previously reported thresholds (FAST ≥ 0.67 for ruling-in and ≤ 0.35 for ruling-out fibrotic MASH). We calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates for FAST thresholds alongside 95% confidence intervals following bivariate random- effects models. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 16 studies with 8838 participants. A FAST score ≥ 0.67 yielded a pooled specificity of 0.87 (0.82-0.90) while a FAST score ≤ 0.35 yielded a summary sensitivity of 0.88 (0.83-0.91). At a prevalence of 30%, the positive predictive value for ruling-in fibrotic MASH was 60% while the negative predictive value for ruling-out the target condition was 91%. AST levels, cirrhosis prevalence, and number of pathologists reviewing biopsies were sources of heterogeneity among studies. The certainty of evidence was low to very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FAST score can be used as a triage test for ruling out fibrotic MASH. Nevertheless, its low positive predictive value necessitates sequential testing for ruling-in fibrotic MASH.</p>","PeriodicalId":15877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.16770","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aim: Following the approval of the first agent for the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), identification of patients with fibrotic MASH (MASH with NAS ≥ 4 and fibrosis stage ≥ 2) is crucial. We assessed the performance of FibroScan-aspartate aminotransferase (AST) score (FAST) for ruling in/out fibrotic MASH.

Methods: We searched Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, and gray literature sources up to January 11, 2024. Studies were eligible if they assessed the accuracy of FAST score for the detection of fibrotic MASH using biopsy as the reference standard at previously reported thresholds (FAST ≥ 0.67 for ruling-in and ≤ 0.35 for ruling-out fibrotic MASH). We calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates for FAST thresholds alongside 95% confidence intervals following bivariate random- effects models. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.

Results: We included 16 studies with 8838 participants. A FAST score ≥ 0.67 yielded a pooled specificity of 0.87 (0.82-0.90) while a FAST score ≤ 0.35 yielded a summary sensitivity of 0.88 (0.83-0.91). At a prevalence of 30%, the positive predictive value for ruling-in fibrotic MASH was 60% while the negative predictive value for ruling-out the target condition was 91%. AST levels, cirrhosis prevalence, and number of pathologists reviewing biopsies were sources of heterogeneity among studies. The certainty of evidence was low to very low.

Conclusions: FAST score can be used as a triage test for ruling out fibrotic MASH. Nevertheless, its low positive predictive value necessitates sequential testing for ruling-in fibrotic MASH.

用于诊断纤维化 MASH 的 FibroScan-AST 评分:诊断测试准确性研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景和目的:在首个治疗代谢功能障碍相关性脂肪性肝炎(MASH)的药物获得批准后,识别纤维化MASH(NAS≥4且纤维化分期≥2的MASH)患者至关重要。我们评估了纤维扫描-天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶(AST)评分(FAST)在排除/排除纤维化MASH方面的性能:我们检索了 Medline、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Scopus 和截至 2024 年 1 月 11 日的灰色文献资料。如果研究以活检为参考标准,评估了FAST评分在检测纤维化MASH方面的准确性,并达到之前报道的阈值(FAST≥0.67判定为纤维化MASH,≤0.35判定为纤维化MASH),则符合条件。我们采用双变量随机效应模型计算了FAST阈值的集合灵敏度和特异性估计值以及95%置信区间。我们采用建议分级评估、发展和评价框架对证据的确定性进行了评估:我们纳入了 16 项研究,共有 8838 名参与者。FAST 评分≥ 0.67 的汇总特异性为 0.87(0.82-0.90),而 FAST 评分≤ 0.35 的汇总灵敏度为 0.88(0.83-0.91)。在发病率为 30% 的情况下,排除纤维化 MASH 的阳性预测值为 60%,而排除目标病症的阴性预测值为 91%。谷草转氨酶水平、肝硬化患病率和审查活检的病理学家人数是研究间异质性的来源。证据的确定性从低到极低:结论:FAST评分可作为排除纤维化MASH的分流测试。结论:FAST评分可作为排除纤维化MASH的分流检测,但其阳性预测值较低,因此有必要进行连续检测以排除纤维化MASH。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
326
审稿时长
2.3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology is produced 12 times per year and publishes peer-reviewed original papers, reviews and editorials concerned with clinical practice and research in the fields of hepatology, gastroenterology and endoscopy. Papers cover the medical, radiological, pathological, biochemical, physiological and historical aspects of the subject areas. All submitted papers are reviewed by at least two referees expert in the field of the submitted paper.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信