Transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting rectosigmoid deep infiltrating endometriosis: a comparative meta-analysis.

IF 3.1 3区医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL

Frontiers in Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-17 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fmed.2025.1552185

Ziwei Xu, Yisheng Li, Yingying Wang, Yiting Wan, Jing Chen

{"title":"Transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting rectosigmoid deep infiltrating endometriosis: a comparative meta-analysis.","authors":"Ziwei Xu, Yisheng Li, Yingying Wang, Yiting Wan, Jing Chen","doi":"10.3389/fmed.2025.1552185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic efficacy of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the detection of rectosigmoid deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).Methods: A thorough systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed and Embase databases for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of TVS and MRI in rectosigmoid DIE, up until August 12, 2024. The DerSimonian and Laird approach was utilized to calculate sensitivity and specificity, with the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation employed for data analysis. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool.Results: The meta-analysis encompassed 10 studies involving 1,604 patients. The findings revealed that TVS had an overall sensitivity of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.76-0.92) and specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.98), while MRI demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.73-0.92) and specificity of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.90-0.99). Statistical analysis indicated no significant differences in sensitivity (p = 0.86) or specificity (p = 0.50) between the two imaging techniques. Additionally, the funnel plot asymmetry test did not reveal significant publication bias for any outcomes (Egger's test: all p > 0.05).Conclusion: The meta-analysis reveals nearly equivalent diagnostic performance of TVS and MRI in detecting rectosigmoid DIE, with no statistical differences in sensitivity and specificity. However, high heterogeneity among studies highlights the need for further prospective research.Systematic review registration: The protocol for this meta-analysis has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the ID: CRD42024559141, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024559141.","PeriodicalId":12488,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Medicine","volume":"12 ","pages":"1552185"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11955469/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2025.1552185","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic efficacy of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the detection of rectosigmoid deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).

Methods: A thorough systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed and Embase databases for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of TVS and MRI in rectosigmoid DIE, up until August 12, 2024. The DerSimonian and Laird approach was utilized to calculate sensitivity and specificity, with the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation employed for data analysis. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool.

Results: The meta-analysis encompassed 10 studies involving 1,604 patients. The findings revealed that TVS had an overall sensitivity of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.76-0.92) and specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.98), while MRI demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.73-0.92) and specificity of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.90-0.99). Statistical analysis indicated no significant differences in sensitivity (p = 0.86) or specificity (p = 0.50) between the two imaging techniques. Additionally, the funnel plot asymmetry test did not reveal significant publication bias for any outcomes (Egger's test: all p > 0.05).

Conclusion: The meta-analysis reveals nearly equivalent diagnostic performance of TVS and MRI in detecting rectosigmoid DIE, with no statistical differences in sensitivity and specificity. However, high heterogeneity among studies highlights the need for further prospective research.

Systematic review registration: The protocol for this meta-analysis has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the ID: CRD42024559141, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024559141.

查看原文本刊更多论文

经阴道超声和磁共振成像检测直肠乙状结肠深浸润性子宫内膜异位症：一项比较荟萃分析。

目的：本荟萃分析旨在评价经阴道超声（TVS）和磁共振成像（MRI）对直肠乙状结肠深浸润性子宫内膜异位症（DIE）的诊断效果。方法：通过检索PubMed和Embase数据库，对截至2024年8月12日TVS和MRI诊断直肠乙状结肠死亡的研究进行全面的系统回顾。采用DerSimonian和Laird方法计算灵敏度和特异性，采用Freeman-Tukey双反正弦变换进行数据分析。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估-2 （QUADAS-2）工具评估纳入研究的质量。结果：荟萃分析包括10项研究，涉及1,604例患者。结果显示，TVS的总敏感性为0.85 (95% CI: 0.76-0.92)，特异性为0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.98)，而MRI的敏感性为0.83 (95% CI: 0.73-0.92)，特异性为0.95 （95% CI: 0.90-0.99）。统计学分析显示两种成像技术在敏感性（p = 0.86）和特异性（p = 0.50）上无显著差异。此外，漏斗图不对称检验未发现任何结果存在显著的发表偏倚（Egger检验：均p > 0.05）。结论：meta分析显示TVS和MRI在直肠乙状结肠死亡诊断中的表现几乎相当，在敏感性和特异性上无统计学差异。然而，研究之间的高度异质性突出了进一步前瞻性研究的必要性。系统评价注册：本荟萃分析的方案已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册（PROSPERO）注册，ID: CRD42024559141, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024559141。

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

Frontiers in Medicine Medicine-General Medicine

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

5.10%

发文量

3710

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Frontiers in Medicine publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research linking basic research to clinical practice and patient care, as well as translating scientific advances into new therapies and diagnostic tools. Led by an outstanding Editorial Board of international experts, this multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. In addition to papers that provide a link between basic research and clinical practice, a particular emphasis is given to studies that are directly relevant to patient care. In this spirit, the journal publishes the latest research results and medical knowledge that facilitate the translation of scientific advances into new therapies or diagnostic tools. The full listing of the Specialty Sections represented by Frontiers in Medicine is as listed below. As well as the established medical disciplines, Frontiers in Medicine is launching new sections that together will facilitate - the use of patient-reported outcomes under real world conditions - the exploitation of big data and the use of novel information and communication tools in the assessment of new medicines - the scientific bases for guidelines and decisions from regulatory authorities - access to medicinal products and medical devices worldwide - addressing the grand health challenges around the world