A systematic review of the effectiveness and the diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative ultrasound in the resection of low-grade gliomas.

IF 1.4 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Athanasios Gkampenis, Ioannis Koukoulithras, Marios Lampros, Panagiota Zagorianakou, Spyridon Voulgaris, George A Alexiou
{"title":"A systematic review of the effectiveness and the diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative ultrasound in the resection of low-grade gliomas.","authors":"Athanasios Gkampenis, Ioannis Koukoulithras, Marios Lampros, Panagiota Zagorianakou, Spyridon Voulgaris, George A Alexiou","doi":"10.1007/s40477-025-01076-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of intraoperative ultrasound (iUS) in achieving gross total resections (GTR) and identifying tumor remnants in low-grade glioma (LGG) surgeries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search of Medline, Cochrane, and Scopus databases until 8th August 2024 was performed to retrieve relevant studies, while reference lists were also scanned. Studies were selected based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and their methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen studies were included: 1 prospective randomized controlled trial, 10 prospective studies and 2 retrospective studies. Of these, five studies had a high risk of bias, and eight had significant concerns regarding applicability. One study provided only mean volumes of tumor remnants, while the remaining 12 studies included a total of 352 patients. Eight studies used 2D B-mode iUS, and five used 3D navigated iUS. There was considerable variability in iUS characteristics, reference methods, and outcome measures. Linear array iUS generally demonstrated superior characteristics, and 3D iUS showed promising potential. Sensitivity ranged from 21.05% to 100%, and GTR percentages varied from 10.71% to 100%, while specificity ranged from 66.67% to 100%. Data on remnant volumes were available from only three studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>From the available literature no safe assumptions on neither the diagnostic accuracy nor the efficacy of iUS in LGG resections can be made.</p>","PeriodicalId":51528,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ultrasound","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ultrasound","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40477-025-01076-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of intraoperative ultrasound (iUS) in achieving gross total resections (GTR) and identifying tumor remnants in low-grade glioma (LGG) surgeries.

Methods: A search of Medline, Cochrane, and Scopus databases until 8th August 2024 was performed to retrieve relevant studies, while reference lists were also scanned. Studies were selected based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and their methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool.

Results: Thirteen studies were included: 1 prospective randomized controlled trial, 10 prospective studies and 2 retrospective studies. Of these, five studies had a high risk of bias, and eight had significant concerns regarding applicability. One study provided only mean volumes of tumor remnants, while the remaining 12 studies included a total of 352 patients. Eight studies used 2D B-mode iUS, and five used 3D navigated iUS. There was considerable variability in iUS characteristics, reference methods, and outcome measures. Linear array iUS generally demonstrated superior characteristics, and 3D iUS showed promising potential. Sensitivity ranged from 21.05% to 100%, and GTR percentages varied from 10.71% to 100%, while specificity ranged from 66.67% to 100%. Data on remnant volumes were available from only three studies.

Conclusions: From the available literature no safe assumptions on neither the diagnostic accuracy nor the efficacy of iUS in LGG resections can be made.

术中超声在低级别胶质瘤切除术中的有效性和诊断准确性的系统综述。
目的:本系统综述旨在评价术中超声(iUS)在低级别胶质瘤(LGG)手术中实现总切除(GTR)和识别肿瘤残余的有效性。方法:检索截至2024年8月8日的Medline、Cochrane和Scopus数据库,检索相关研究,并扫描文献列表。根据预先确定的纳入和排除标准选择研究,并使用诊断准确性研究质量评估2 (QUADAS-2)工具评估其方法学质量。结果:共纳入13项研究:1项前瞻性随机对照试验,10项前瞻性研究,2项回顾性研究。其中,5项研究存在高偏倚风险,8项研究在适用性方面存在重大问题。一项研究仅提供了平均肿瘤残留体积,而其余12项研究共包括352名患者。8项研究使用2D b模式iu, 5项研究使用3D导航iu。在国际单位特征、参考方法和结果测量方面存在相当大的差异。线性阵列国际单位普遍表现出优越的性能,而三维国际单位则显示出良好的发展潜力。敏感性为21.05% ~ 100%,GTR百分比为10.71% ~ 100%,特异性为66.67% ~ 100%。残存体积的数据仅来自三项研究。结论:从现有的文献来看,无论是对诊断的准确性还是对输精管输精管切除术的疗效,我们都不能做出安全的假设。
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
Journal of Ultrasound
Journal of Ultrasound RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
15.00%
发文量
133
期刊介绍: The Journal of Ultrasound is the official journal of the Italian Society for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (SIUMB). The journal publishes original contributions (research and review articles, case reports, technical reports and letters to the editor) on significant advances in clinical diagnostic, interventional and therapeutic applications, clinical techniques, the physics, engineering and technology of ultrasound in medicine and biology, and in cross-sectional diagnostic imaging. The official language of Journal of Ultrasound is English.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信