Diagnostic accuracy of imaging-guided biopsy of peripheral pulmonary lesions: a systematic review.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Acta radiologica Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1177/02841851241265707
Andrea Magnini, Armitha Fissi, Lorenzo Cinci, Linda Calistri, Nicholas Landini, Cosimo Nardi
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy of imaging-guided biopsy of peripheral pulmonary lesions: a systematic review.","authors":"Andrea Magnini, Armitha Fissi, Lorenzo Cinci, Linda Calistri, Nicholas Landini, Cosimo Nardi","doi":"10.1177/02841851241265707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The histologic definition of peripheral pulmonary lesion (PPL) is critical for a correct diagnosis and appropriate therapy. Non-invasive techniques for PPL biopsy are imaging-guided, using endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS), computed tomography (CT), and electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB). To assess the diagnostic accuracy of PPL biopsy and provide a framework for reporting data for accuracy studies of PPL biopsy. A systematic review was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify all the articles assessing the accuracy of EBUS, CT, and ENB between January 2000 and June 2023 basing search queries on keywords emerging from PICO question. Only studies investigating biopsy of PPL and reporting accuracy or necessary data to calculate it independently were included. Risk of bias was based on QUADAS-2 tool. In total, 81 studies were included. Median accuracy was 0.78 (range=0.51-0.94) in the EBUS group, 0.91 (range=0.73-0.97) in the CT group, 0.72 (range=0.59-0.97) in the ENB group, and 0.77 (range=0.61-0.92) in the combined group. Sensitivity and NPV ranges were 0.35-0.94 and 0.26-0.88 in the EBUS group, 0.71-0.97 and 0.46-1.00 in the CT group, 0.55-0.96 and 0.32-0.90 in the ENB group, and 0.70-0.90 and 0.28-0.79 in the combined group. Specificity and PPV were 1.00 in almost all studies. Overall complication rate was 3%, 30%, 8%, and 5% in the EBUS, CT, ENB, and combined groups. CT-guided biopsy was the most accurate technique, although with the highest complication rate. When calculating accuracy, indeterminate results must be considered false negatives according to the \"intention-to-diagnose\" principle.</p>","PeriodicalId":7143,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica","volume":" ","pages":"1222-1237"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851241265707","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The histologic definition of peripheral pulmonary lesion (PPL) is critical for a correct diagnosis and appropriate therapy. Non-invasive techniques for PPL biopsy are imaging-guided, using endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS), computed tomography (CT), and electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy (ENB). To assess the diagnostic accuracy of PPL biopsy and provide a framework for reporting data for accuracy studies of PPL biopsy. A systematic review was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify all the articles assessing the accuracy of EBUS, CT, and ENB between January 2000 and June 2023 basing search queries on keywords emerging from PICO question. Only studies investigating biopsy of PPL and reporting accuracy or necessary data to calculate it independently were included. Risk of bias was based on QUADAS-2 tool. In total, 81 studies were included. Median accuracy was 0.78 (range=0.51-0.94) in the EBUS group, 0.91 (range=0.73-0.97) in the CT group, 0.72 (range=0.59-0.97) in the ENB group, and 0.77 (range=0.61-0.92) in the combined group. Sensitivity and NPV ranges were 0.35-0.94 and 0.26-0.88 in the EBUS group, 0.71-0.97 and 0.46-1.00 in the CT group, 0.55-0.96 and 0.32-0.90 in the ENB group, and 0.70-0.90 and 0.28-0.79 in the combined group. Specificity and PPV were 1.00 in almost all studies. Overall complication rate was 3%, 30%, 8%, and 5% in the EBUS, CT, ENB, and combined groups. CT-guided biopsy was the most accurate technique, although with the highest complication rate. When calculating accuracy, indeterminate results must be considered false negatives according to the "intention-to-diagnose" principle.

影像引导下肺外周病变活检的诊断准确性:系统综述。
外周肺病变(PPL)的组织学定义对于正确诊断和适当治疗至关重要。PPL 活检的非侵入性技术是在影像学引导下使用支气管内超声(EBUS)、计算机断层扫描(CT)和电磁导航支气管镜(ENB)进行的。为了评估 PPL 活检的诊断准确性,并为 PPL 活检准确性研究的数据报告提供一个框架。我们在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 上进行了系统性回顾,根据 PICO 问题中出现的关键词进行搜索查询,以确定 2000 年 1 月至 2023 年 6 月间所有评估 EBUS、CT 和 ENB 准确性的文章。只有调查 PPL 活检并报告准确性或独立计算准确性所需的数据的研究才被纳入。偏倚风险基于 QUADAS-2 工具。共纳入 81 项研究。EBUS组的中位准确率为0.78(范围=0.51-0.94),CT组为0.91(范围=0.73-0.97),ENB组为0.72(范围=0.59-0.97),综合组为0.77(范围=0.61-0.92)。EBUS 组的敏感性和 NPV 范围分别为 0.35-0.94 和 0.26-0.88,CT 组的敏感性和 NPV 范围分别为 0.71-0.97 和 0.46-1.00,ENB 组的敏感性和 NPV 范围分别为 0.55-0.96 和 0.32-0.90,联合组的敏感性和 NPV 范围分别为 0.70-0.90 和 0.28-0.79。几乎所有研究的特异性和 PPV 均为 1.00。EBUS组、CT组、ENB组和联合组的总体并发症发生率分别为3%、30%、8%和5%。CT 引导活检是最准确的技术,但并发症发生率最高。在计算准确性时,根据 "意向诊断 "原则,不确定的结果必须视为假阴性。
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
Acta radiologica
Acta radiologica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
170
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Radiologica publishes articles on all aspects of radiology, from clinical radiology to experimental work. It is known for articles based on experimental work and contrast media research, giving priority to scientific original papers. The distinguished international editorial board also invite review articles, short communications and technical and instrumental notes.
×
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