What Is the Added Value of DWI Compared With Structured Assessment of BI-RADS Criteria by the Kaiser Score? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 7 1区医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

Investigative Radiology Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-09 DOI:10.1097/RLI.0000000000001123

Matthias Dietzel, Giulia Vatteroni, Pascal A T Baltzer

{"title":"What Is the Added Value of DWI Compared With Structured Assessment of BI-RADS Criteria by the Kaiser Score? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Matthias Dietzel, Giulia Vatteroni, Pascal A T Baltzer","doi":"10.1097/RLI.0000000000001123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the added value of DWI compared with the structured assessment of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser score.Materials and methods: Articles published in English until May 2024 were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data on the characteristics of studies evaluating the added value of DWI to distinguish benign from malignant breast lesions compared with structured assessment of the BI-RADS criteria. Using bivariate random-effects models, the sensitivity and specificity were calculated. I2 statistics, Deek's funnel plot asymmetry test for publication bias, and meta-regression were applied for the data analysis.Results: Five studies comprising 1005 malignant and 846 benign lesions were eligible for data synthesis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates of structured BI-RADS assessment were 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 92.6%-97.5%) and 68.7% (95% CI, 60.9%-75.6%), respectively. Adding DWI to the structured BI-RADS assessment achieved a pooled sensitivity of 94.4% (95% CI, 90.5%-96.7%) and a pooled specificity of 74.9% (95% CI, 68.8%-80.2%). Adding DWI to the structured BI-RADS assessment significantly changed neither the sensitivity ( P = 0.52) nor the specificity ( P = 0.20).Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed only a limited, statistically nonsignificant added value of DWI compared with the structured assessment of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser score.","PeriodicalId":14486,"journal":{"name":"Investigative Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"175-183"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigative Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000001123","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the added value of DWI compared with the structured assessment of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser score.

Materials and methods: Articles published in English until May 2024 were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data on the characteristics of studies evaluating the added value of DWI to distinguish benign from malignant breast lesions compared with structured assessment of the BI-RADS criteria. Using bivariate random-effects models, the sensitivity and specificity were calculated. I2 statistics, Deek's funnel plot asymmetry test for publication bias, and meta-regression were applied for the data analysis.

Results: Five studies comprising 1005 malignant and 846 benign lesions were eligible for data synthesis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates of structured BI-RADS assessment were 95.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 92.6%-97.5%) and 68.7% (95% CI, 60.9%-75.6%), respectively. Adding DWI to the structured BI-RADS assessment achieved a pooled sensitivity of 94.4% (95% CI, 90.5%-96.7%) and a pooled specificity of 74.9% (95% CI, 68.8%-80.2%). Adding DWI to the structured BI-RADS assessment significantly changed neither the sensitivity ( P = 0.52) nor the specificity ( P = 0.20).

Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed only a limited, statistically nonsignificant added value of DWI compared with the structured assessment of BI-RADS criteria using the Kaiser score.

查看原文本刊更多论文

与Kaiser评分对BI-RADS标准的结构化评估相比，DWI的附加价值是什么？系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目的：本系统综述和荟萃分析探讨了DWI与使用Kaiser评分的BI-RADS标准结构化评估的附加价值。材料与方法：纳入截至2024年5月已发表的英文文章。两名独立审稿人提取了与BI-RADS标准的结构化评估相比，评估DWI鉴别乳腺良恶性病变附加价值的研究特征的数据。采用双变量随机效应模型，计算敏感性和特异性。采用I2统计、Deek的漏斗图不对称发表偏倚检验和meta回归进行数据分析。结果：5项研究包括1005个恶性病变和846个良性病变，符合数据综合。结构化BI-RADS评估的综合敏感性和特异性估计分别为95.7%（95%可信区间[CI]， 92.6%-97.5%）和68.7% （95% CI, 60.9%-75.6%）。将DWI加入结构化BI-RADS评估，合并敏感性为94.4% (95% CI, 90.5%-96.7%)，合并特异性为74.9% （95% CI, 68.8%-80.2%）。将DWI加入结构化BI-RADS评估，既没有显著改变敏感性（P = 0.52），也没有显著改变特异性（P = 0.20）。结论：该系统回顾和荟萃分析显示，与使用Kaiser评分的BI-RADS标准的结构化评估相比，DWI的附加价值有限，统计学上不显著。

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

Investigative Radiology 医学-核医学

CiteScore

15.10

自引率

16.40%

发文量

188

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Investigative Radiology publishes original, peer-reviewed reports on clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, and related modalities. Emphasis is on early and timely publication. Primarily research-oriented, the journal also includes a wide variety of features of interest to clinical radiologists.