PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 25, 2026Liver International1 citations

What Can We Learn From Longitudinal Measurements of Liver Stiffness in Metabolic Dysfunction‐Associated Steatotic Liver Disease?

View Full Paper
SAStéphanie André-DumontCliniques Universitaires Saint-LucNLNicolas LanthierCliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc

Key Points

  • To evaluate how longitudinal liver stiffness measurements (LSM) can inform the clinical management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD).
  • Synthesis of observational studies on longitudinal LSM changes.
  • Discussion of clinical outcomes, including liver-related events (LREs).
  • Evaluation of study designs and LSM threshold definitions across different studies.
  • A relative change of 20% in LSM differentiates between improvers, stable, and progressors of MASLD.
  • LSM progression correlates with increased risk of liver-related events and extra-hepatic complications.
  • There is significant variability in hepatic disease severity and follow-up intervals across studies.

Abstract

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is the most prevalent chronic liver disease worldwide and can potentially progress to fibrosis, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver failure. Vibration-controlled transient elastography allows regular, non-invasive assessment of fibrosis through the liver stiffness measurement (LSM). Currently, static measurements are mainly used, whereas longitudinal assessment may better capture disease evolution and response to treatment. This review synthesises the available evidence on longitudinal LSM changes in observational studies and discusses study designs, clinical outcomes, including liver-related events (LREs), thresholds and the potential influence on clinical decisions. Across studies, there is considerable variation in terms of hepatic disease severity, follow-up intervals and definition of LSM thresholds. A relative change of 20% in LSM is most commonly used to determine three groups of patients based on their clinical evolution: improvers, stable and progressors. Most studies report that LSM progression is associated with an increased risk of LREs and extra-hepatic complications (cardiovascular events, intramuscular fat and type 2 diabetes). In conclusion, monitoring dynamic changes in LSM provides good risk stratification, complements static measurements and can optimise the management of patients with MASLD. However, further studies with longer and standardised follow-up are needed, as well as including the full spectrum of MASLD forms.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

André-Dumont et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a13e8d20e02ee3982d33616https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.70680
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Vibration-Controlled Transient Elastography Scores to Predict Liver-Related Events in Steatotic Liver Disease2024 · 233 citations
  2. 2Predictive value of ALT levels for non‐alcoholic steatohepatitis ( NASH ) and advanced fibrosis in non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease ( NAFLD )2013 · 321 citations
  3. 3Impact of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Agonists on Myosteatosis in the Context of Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease2024 · 7 citations
  4. 4Link between gut microbiota and health outcomes in inulin -treated obese patients: Lessons from the Food4Gut multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial2020 · 170 citations
  5. 5Longitudinal Changes in Fibrosis Markers: Monitoring Stiffness/Fibrosis Progression and Prognostic Outcomes in MASLD2025 · 30 citations