Diagnostic test accuracies of F-18 FDG PET for characterization of cardiac masses compared to conventional imaging techniques: Systematic review and Meta-analysis.
{"title":"Diagnostic test accuracies of F-18 FDG PET for characterization of cardiac masses compared to conventional imaging techniques: Systematic review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Keunyoung Kim, W. Ko, Seong-Jang Kim","doi":"10.1259/bjr.20210263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nThe present systematic review and meta-analysis compared the diagnostic performance of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (F-18FDG PET) and conventional imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging, echocardiography, and computed tomography, in characterising cardiac masses.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases for studies comparing the diagnostic accuracies of F-18 FDG PET and conventional imaging in characterising cardiac masses, from inception of indexing to July 31, 2020, was performed. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool was used to assess study quality. Sensitivity and specificity across the studies were determined, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR + and LR-, respectively) were calculated, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf six included studies (n = 212 patients), F-18 FDG PET demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-0.94) and a pooled specificity of 0.89 (95% CI 0.80-0.94). LR syntheses yielded an overall LR +of 7.9 (95% CI 4.3-14.6) and LR- of 0.12 (95% CI 0.07-0.22). The calculated pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 64 (95% CI 23-181). For conventional imaging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.81) and the pooled specificity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.88-0.98). LR syntheses yielded an overall LR +of 16.1 (95% CI 5.8-44.5) and LR- of 0.31 (95% CI 0.21-0.46). The evaluated pooled DOR was 52 (95% CI 17-155).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nF-18 FDG PET and conventional imaging demonstrated comparable diagnostic accuracies for the characterisation of cardiac masses. Further large multicentre studies are, however, required to corroborate the diagnostic performances of F-18 FDG PET and conventional imaging for the characterisation of cardiac masses.\n\n\nADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE\nNo previous studies have comprehensively analysed the diagnostic performance of F-18 FDG PET/CT compared with conventional imaging techniques including echocardiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. According to the current study, F-18 FDG PET/CT yielded a pooled DOR of 64, whereas other conventional imaging techniques demonstrated a DOR of 52. As such, F-18 FDG PET/CT demonstrated sensitivity and specificity, with a high pooled DOR comparable with other conventional imaging modalities.","PeriodicalId":226783,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of radiology","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20210263","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
The present systematic review and meta-analysis compared the diagnostic performance of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (F-18FDG PET) and conventional imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging, echocardiography, and computed tomography, in characterising cardiac masses.
METHODS
A literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases for studies comparing the diagnostic accuracies of F-18 FDG PET and conventional imaging in characterising cardiac masses, from inception of indexing to July 31, 2020, was performed. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool was used to assess study quality. Sensitivity and specificity across the studies were determined, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR + and LR-, respectively) were calculated, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed.
RESULTS
Of six included studies (n = 212 patients), F-18 FDG PET demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-0.94) and a pooled specificity of 0.89 (95% CI 0.80-0.94). LR syntheses yielded an overall LR +of 7.9 (95% CI 4.3-14.6) and LR- of 0.12 (95% CI 0.07-0.22). The calculated pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 64 (95% CI 23-181). For conventional imaging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.81) and the pooled specificity was 0.96 (95% CI 0.88-0.98). LR syntheses yielded an overall LR +of 16.1 (95% CI 5.8-44.5) and LR- of 0.31 (95% CI 0.21-0.46). The evaluated pooled DOR was 52 (95% CI 17-155).
CONCLUSION
F-18 FDG PET and conventional imaging demonstrated comparable diagnostic accuracies for the characterisation of cardiac masses. Further large multicentre studies are, however, required to corroborate the diagnostic performances of F-18 FDG PET and conventional imaging for the characterisation of cardiac masses.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE
No previous studies have comprehensively analysed the diagnostic performance of F-18 FDG PET/CT compared with conventional imaging techniques including echocardiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. According to the current study, F-18 FDG PET/CT yielded a pooled DOR of 64, whereas other conventional imaging techniques demonstrated a DOR of 52. As such, F-18 FDG PET/CT demonstrated sensitivity and specificity, with a high pooled DOR comparable with other conventional imaging modalities.