We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Value and impact factors of multidetector computed tomography in diagnosis of preoperative lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.
Medicine (Baltimore) 2017 August
BACKGROUND: Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) exhibited wide ranges of sensitivities and specificities for lymph node assessment of gastric cancer (GC) in several individual studies. This present meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate the value of MDCT in diagnosis of preoperative lymph node metastasis (LNM) and to explore the impact factors that might explain the heterogeneity of its diagnostic accuracy in GC.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted to collect all the relevant studies about the value of MDCT in assessing LNM of GC within the PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase databases up to Feb 2, 2016. Two investigators independently screened the studies, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of included studies. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under ROC curve (AUC) were pooled to estimate the overall accuracy of MDCT. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were carried out to identify the possible factors influencing the heterogeneity of the accuracy.
RESULTS: A total of 27 studies with 6519 subjects were finally included. Overall, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.56-0.77), 0.86 (95% CI: 0.81-0.90), and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89), respectively. Meta-regression revealed that MDCT section thickness, proportion of serosal invasion, and publication year were the main significant impact factors in sensitivity, and MDCT section thickness, multiplanar reformation (MPR), and reference standard were the main significant impact factors in specificity. After the included studies were divided into 2 groups (Group A: studies with proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects ≥50%; Group B: studies with proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects <50%), the pooled sensitivity in Group A was significantly higher than in Group B (0.84 [95% CI: 0.75-0.90] vs 0.55 [95% CI: 0.41-0.68], P < .01). For early gastric cancer (EGC), the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15-0.61), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.95), and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86), respectively.
CONCLUSION: To summarize, MDCT tends to be adequate to assess preoperative LNM in serosa-invasive GC, but insufficient for non-serosa-invasive GC (particularly for EGC) owing to its low sensitivity. Proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects, MDCT section thickness, MPR, and reference standard are the main factors influencing its diagnostic accuracy.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted to collect all the relevant studies about the value of MDCT in assessing LNM of GC within the PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase databases up to Feb 2, 2016. Two investigators independently screened the studies, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of included studies. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under ROC curve (AUC) were pooled to estimate the overall accuracy of MDCT. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were carried out to identify the possible factors influencing the heterogeneity of the accuracy.
RESULTS: A total of 27 studies with 6519 subjects were finally included. Overall, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.56-0.77), 0.86 (95% CI: 0.81-0.90), and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89), respectively. Meta-regression revealed that MDCT section thickness, proportion of serosal invasion, and publication year were the main significant impact factors in sensitivity, and MDCT section thickness, multiplanar reformation (MPR), and reference standard were the main significant impact factors in specificity. After the included studies were divided into 2 groups (Group A: studies with proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects ≥50%; Group B: studies with proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects <50%), the pooled sensitivity in Group A was significantly higher than in Group B (0.84 [95% CI: 0.75-0.90] vs 0.55 [95% CI: 0.41-0.68], P < .01). For early gastric cancer (EGC), the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15-0.61), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.95), and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86), respectively.
CONCLUSION: To summarize, MDCT tends to be adequate to assess preoperative LNM in serosa-invasive GC, but insufficient for non-serosa-invasive GC (particularly for EGC) owing to its low sensitivity. Proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects, MDCT section thickness, MPR, and reference standard are the main factors influencing its diagnostic accuracy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app