Application value of different imaging methods in the early diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.

IF 3.5 3区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY

Frontiers in Oncology Pub Date : 2025-01-14 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fonc.2024.1510296

Jian Dong, Zhen Wang, Si-Rui Wang, Huan Zhao, Jun Li, Ting Ma

{"title":"Application value of different imaging methods in the early diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.","authors":"Jian Dong, Zhen Wang, Si-Rui Wang, Huan Zhao, Jun Li, Ting Ma","doi":"10.3389/fonc.2024.1510296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To determine the diagnostic value of ultrasound, multi-phase enhanced computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging of small hepatocellular carcinoma.Methods: Experimental studies on diagnosing small hepatocellular carcinoma in four databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase, were comprehensively searched from October 2007 to October 2024. Relevant diagnostic accuracy data were extracted and a Bayesian model that combined direct and indirect evidence was used for analysis.Results: 16 original studies were included and data from 2,447 patients were collated to assess the diagnostic value of 10 different methods. The methodological quality of the included studies was good and there was no obvious publication bias. The pooled DOR of all diagnostic methods was 19.61, which was statistically significant (I2 = 76.0%, P < 0.01, 95% CI:13.30 - 28.92). Normal US + CEUS + ultrasonic elastic imaging had the highest specificity (92.9), accuracy (93.6), and positive predictive value (94.4). Unenhanced MRI + Contrast-enhanced MRI had the highest sensitivity (96.6) and negative predictive value (96.6), but specificity (12.5) and positive predictive value (34.4) were extremely poor. Contrast-enhanced MRI had the highest diagnostic value in individual imaging methods (sensitivity: 66, specificity: 55.5, accuracy: 67.9, positive predictive value: 64.4, negative predictive value: 66.5). There was significant inconsistency and high heterogeneity in this study.Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42024507883.","PeriodicalId":12482,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Oncology","volume":"14 ","pages":"1510296"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11772129/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1510296","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine the diagnostic value of ultrasound, multi-phase enhanced computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging of small hepatocellular carcinoma.

Methods: Experimental studies on diagnosing small hepatocellular carcinoma in four databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase, were comprehensively searched from October 2007 to October 2024. Relevant diagnostic accuracy data were extracted and a Bayesian model that combined direct and indirect evidence was used for analysis.

Results: 16 original studies were included and data from 2,447 patients were collated to assess the diagnostic value of 10 different methods. The methodological quality of the included studies was good and there was no obvious publication bias. The pooled DOR of all diagnostic methods was 19.61, which was statistically significant (I² = 76.0%, P < 0.01, 95% CI:13.30 - 28.92). Normal US + CEUS + ultrasonic elastic imaging had the highest specificity (92.9), accuracy (93.6), and positive predictive value (94.4). Unenhanced MRI + Contrast-enhanced MRI had the highest sensitivity (96.6) and negative predictive value (96.6), but specificity (12.5) and positive predictive value (34.4) were extremely poor. Contrast-enhanced MRI had the highest diagnostic value in individual imaging methods (sensitivity: 66, specificity: 55.5, accuracy: 67.9, positive predictive value: 64.4, negative predictive value: 66.5). There was significant inconsistency and high heterogeneity in this study.

Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42024507883.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Frontiers in Oncology Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cancer Research

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

10.60%

发文量

6641

审稿时长

14 weeks

期刊介绍： Cancer Imaging and Diagnosis is dedicated to the publication of results from clinical and research studies applied to cancer diagnosis and treatment. The section aims to publish studies from the entire field of cancer imaging: results from routine use of clinical imaging in both radiology and nuclear medicine, results from clinical trials, experimental molecular imaging in humans and small animals, research on new contrast agents in CT, MRI, ultrasound, publication of new technical applications and processing algorithms to improve the standardization of quantitative imaging and image guided interventions for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.