Minimum Fascia-Tumour Distance for Differentiating Deep Lobe From Superficial Lobe Benign Parotid Tumours: A Retrospective Study and Meta-Analysis

IF 1.7 4区医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY

Clinical Otolaryngology Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1111/coa.14207

Yi-Chan Lee, Yao-Te Tsai, Ming-Shao Tsai, Ti-Yung Tseng, Chih-Chen Chang, Kai-Ping Chang

{"title":"Minimum Fascia-Tumour Distance for Differentiating Deep Lobe From Superficial Lobe Benign Parotid Tumours: A Retrospective Study and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Yi-Chan Lee, Yao-Te Tsai, Ming-Shao Tsai, Ti-Yung Tseng, Chih-Chen Chang, Kai-Ping Chang","doi":"10.1111/coa.14207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>This study was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of the minimum fascia-tumour distance (MFTD) in distinguishing deep-lobe benign parotid tumours from superficial-lobe tumours through both an original study and a meta-analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of data from 91 patients who had been diagnosed with benign parotid tumours. The MFTD values were sourced from preoperative ultrasound examinations. The locations of these tumours were confirmed through surgical findings. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of MFTD by utilising receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Additionally, we conducted a systematic review of the pertinent literature and performed a diagnostic meta-analysis to ascertain the overall diagnostic efficacy of MFTD in identifying benign parotid tumours.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Patients with tumours in the deep lobe had a significantly greater MFTD than patients with tumours in the superficial lobe. Using a cutoff value of 3.50 mm for MFTD, we found an AUC of 0.93, a sensitivity of 81.8%, and a specificity of 98.8%. Our meta-analysis included seven studies covering a total of 1689 tumours. The pooled values for sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (OR) of MFTD were 81.0%, 89.0%, and 32.2, respectively. The AUC of the summarised ROC curve of MFTD was 0.90.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The MFTD demonstrated reliable diagnostic accuracy in identifying deep-lobe benign parotid tumours and may be incorporated into standard evaluations before parotidectomy.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10431,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Otolaryngology","volume":"49 6","pages":"785-792"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/coa.14207","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

This study was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of the minimum fascia-tumour distance (MFTD) in distinguishing deep-lobe benign parotid tumours from superficial-lobe tumours through both an original study and a meta-analysis.

Methods

In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of data from 91 patients who had been diagnosed with benign parotid tumours. The MFTD values were sourced from preoperative ultrasound examinations. The locations of these tumours were confirmed through surgical findings. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of MFTD by utilising receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Additionally, we conducted a systematic review of the pertinent literature and performed a diagnostic meta-analysis to ascertain the overall diagnostic efficacy of MFTD in identifying benign parotid tumours.

Results

Patients with tumours in the deep lobe had a significantly greater MFTD than patients with tumours in the superficial lobe. Using a cutoff value of 3.50 mm for MFTD, we found an AUC of 0.93, a sensitivity of 81.8%, and a specificity of 98.8%. Our meta-analysis included seven studies covering a total of 1689 tumours. The pooled values for sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (OR) of MFTD were 81.0%, 89.0%, and 32.2, respectively. The AUC of the summarised ROC curve of MFTD was 0.90.

Conclusion

The MFTD demonstrated reliable diagnostic accuracy in identifying deep-lobe benign parotid tumours and may be incorporated into standard evaluations before parotidectomy.

查看原文本刊更多论文

区分深叶和浅叶良性腮腺肿瘤的最小筋膜-肿瘤距离：回顾性研究与 Meta 分析。

研究背景本研究旨在通过一项原创性研究和一项荟萃分析，评估最小筋膜-肿瘤距离（MFTD）在区分深叶良性腮腺肿瘤和浅叶肿瘤方面的诊断效果：在这项研究中，我们对 91 名确诊为腮腺良性肿瘤患者的数据进行了回顾性分析。MFTD值来源于术前超声检查。这些肿瘤的位置是通过手术结果确认的。我们利用接收器操作特征曲线（ROC）评估了 MFTD 的诊断准确性。此外，我们还对相关文献进行了系统回顾，并进行了诊断荟萃分析，以确定 MFTD 在鉴别腮腺良性肿瘤方面的总体诊断效果：深叶肿瘤患者的MFTD明显高于浅叶肿瘤患者。以 3.50 毫米为 MFTD 临界值，我们发现 AUC 为 0.93，灵敏度为 81.8%，特异度为 98.8%。我们的荟萃分析包括七项研究，共涉及 1689 个肿瘤。MFTD的灵敏度、特异性和诊断几率比（OR）的汇总值分别为81.0%、89.0%和32.2。MFTD的ROC曲线AUC为0.90：MFTD在鉴别腮腺深叶良性肿瘤方面具有可靠的诊断准确性，可纳入腮腺切除术前的标准评估中。

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

Clinical Otolaryngology 医学-耳鼻喉科学

CiteScore

4.00

自引率

4.80%

发文量

106

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Clinical Otolaryngology is a bimonthly journal devoted to clinically-oriented research papers of the highest scientific standards dealing with: current otorhinolaryngological practice audiology, otology, balance, rhinology, larynx, voice and paediatric ORL head and neck oncology head and neck plastic and reconstructive surgery continuing medical education and ORL training The emphasis is on high quality new work in the clinical field and on fresh, original research. Each issue begins with an editorial expressing the personal opinions of an individual with a particular knowledge of a chosen subject. The main body of each issue is then devoted to original papers carrying important results for those working in the field. In addition, topical review articles are published discussing a particular subject in depth, including not only the opinions of the author but also any controversies surrounding the subject. • Negative/null results In order for research to advance, negative results, which often make a valuable contribution to the field, should be published. However, articles containing negative or null results are frequently not considered for publication or rejected by journals. We welcome papers of this kind, where appropriate and valid power calculations are included that give confidence that a negative result can be relied upon.