TABLE 1.

Diagnostic Performance of MRI Techniques for Liver Fibrosis Quantification

		Fibrosis Stage ≥1			Fibrosis Stage ≥2			Fibrosis Stage ≥3			Fibrosis Stage 4
Technique	Study	Sensitivity	Specificity	AUC	Sensitivity	Specificity	AUC	Sensitivity	Specificity	AUC	Sensitivity	Specificity	AUC
Magnetic resonance elastography	Wang et al, 201227	0.83	0.99	0.95	0.94	0.95	0.98	0.92	0.96	0.98	0.99	0.94	0.99
	Singh et al, 201528	0.73	0.79	0.84	0.79	0.81	0.88	0.85	0.85	0.93	0.91	0.81	0.92
	Guo et al, 201529	0.87	0.93	0.94	0.87	0.94	0.97	0.87	0.92	0.96	0.93	0.91	0.97
Diffusion-weighted imaging	Wang et al, 201227	0.81	0.82	0.86	0.77	0.78	0.83	0.72	0.84	0.86	—	—	—
	Jiang et al, 201630	0.78	0.78	0.86	0.81	0.8	0.88	0.71	0.84	0.88	0.8	0.77	0.86
Texture
Unenhanced	House et al, 201531	—	—	0.78–0.87	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
	Kato et al, 200732	—	—	0.53–0.60	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Double enhanced	Aguirre et al, 200633	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.82–0.89	—	—	—
	Bahl et al, 201234	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.919	0.839	—	—	—	—
	Yokoo et al, 201535	0.659	0.8	0.814	0.895	0.778	0.889	0.778	0.784	0.862	1	0.93	0.976
Gd enhanced	Kato et al, 200732	—	—	0.62–0.80	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Superparamagnetic iron oxide enhanced	Aguirre et al, 200633	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.40–0.84	—	—	—
Perfusion imaging	Hagiwara et al, 200836	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.31–0.92	0.64–1.00	0.61–0.82	—	—	—
	Ou et al, 201337	0.78	0.84	0.83	0.90	0.77	0.85	0.81	0.85	0.88	0.80	0.89	0.92
	Patel et al, 201038	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	0.50–1.00	0.50–1.00	0.57–0.95
Hepatocellular function imaging	Choi et al, 201339	0.46	0.85	—	0.46	0.82	—	0.63	0.68	—	0.76	0.65	—
	Feier et al, 201340	0.70	0.85	0.81	0.75	0.77	0.82	0.73	0.87	0.85	0.83	0.80	0.83
	Goshima et al, 201241	1.00	0.73	0.91	1.00	0.87	0.96	0.74	0.98	0.93	0.91	1.00	0.97
	Motosugi et al, 201142	0.87	0.75	0.82	0.75	0.56	0.68	0.75	0.50	0.63	0.82	0.49	0.62
T1ρ	Allkemper et al, 201443	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	1.00	0.84	0.97

Adapted from Petitclerc et al.⁴⁴.

AUC indicates area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.