美国放射学会对比增强超声肝脏成像报告和数据系统及其修订版在通过 Sonazoid 诊断肝细胞癌方面的应用:一项荟萃分析。

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-27 DOI:10.21037/qims-23-1459
Jiazhi Cao, Hong Wang, Xiaomiao Ruan, Jingwen Yang, Youxiang Ren, Wenwu Ling
{"title":"美国放射学会对比增强超声肝脏成像报告和数据系统及其修订版在通过 Sonazoid 诊断肝细胞癌方面的应用:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Jiazhi Cao, Hong Wang, Xiaomiao Ruan, Jingwen Yang, Youxiang Ren, Wenwu Ling","doi":"10.21037/qims-23-1459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The American College of Radiology (ACR) developed the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) for pure blood contrast agents, but Sonazoid was not included. Modifications to LI-RADS have been proposed for Sonazoid. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to identify and compare the diagnostic efficacy of the two LI-RADS algorithms of Sonazoid.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from databases inception to August 31, 2023, to find original studies on the ACR LI-RADS and/or modified LI-RADS algorithm with Sonazoid used as the contrast agent in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A bivariate random-effects model was used. Data pooling, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were performed for meta-analysis. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess the methodological quality, and the Deeks funnel plot asymmetry test was used to evaluate the publication bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A meta-analysis of 10 studies with 1,611 observations was conducted. The pooled data for ACR LI-RADS category 5 (LR-5) and modified LR-5 were respectively as follows: pooled sensitivity, 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.75] and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86) (P<0.05); pooled specificity, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.82-0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81-0.91) (P>0.05); and pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84 and 0.91. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS category M (LR-M) of the two algorithms was comparable. Study heterogeneity was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results indicated that modified LR-5 algorithm demonstrated improved diagnostic sensitivity compared with the ACR LR-5 algorithm of Sonazoid, with differences observed between the different versions. Further research is needed to validate and explore the optimal diagnostic criteria for HCC using Sonazoid. Before the database search was conducted, this study was registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42023455220).</p>","PeriodicalId":54267,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11250333/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The American College of Radiology contrast-enhanced ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System and its modified version in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma via Sonazoid: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jiazhi Cao, Hong Wang, Xiaomiao Ruan, Jingwen Yang, Youxiang Ren, Wenwu Ling\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/qims-23-1459\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The American College of Radiology (ACR) developed the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) for pure blood contrast agents, but Sonazoid was not included. Modifications to LI-RADS have been proposed for Sonazoid. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to identify and compare the diagnostic efficacy of the two LI-RADS algorithms of Sonazoid.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from databases inception to August 31, 2023, to find original studies on the ACR LI-RADS and/or modified LI-RADS algorithm with Sonazoid used as the contrast agent in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A bivariate random-effects model was used. Data pooling, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were performed for meta-analysis. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess the methodological quality, and the Deeks funnel plot asymmetry test was used to evaluate the publication bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A meta-analysis of 10 studies with 1,611 observations was conducted. The pooled data for ACR LI-RADS category 5 (LR-5) and modified LR-5 were respectively as follows: pooled sensitivity, 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.75] and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86) (P<0.05); pooled specificity, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.82-0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81-0.91) (P>0.05); and pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84 and 0.91. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS category M (LR-M) of the two algorithms was comparable. Study heterogeneity was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results indicated that modified LR-5 algorithm demonstrated improved diagnostic sensitivity compared with the ACR LR-5 algorithm of Sonazoid, with differences observed between the different versions. Further research is needed to validate and explore the optimal diagnostic criteria for HCC using Sonazoid. Before the database search was conducted, this study was registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42023455220).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11250333/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-23-1459\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-23-1459","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:美国放射学会(ACR)为纯血造影剂制定了造影剂增强超声(CEUS)肝脏成像报告和数据系统(LI-RADS),但 Sonazoid 未被包括在内。有人建议针对 Sonazoid 对 LI-RADS 进行修改。本荟萃分析的目的是确定并比较 Sonazoid 的两种 LI-RADS 算法的诊断效果:方法:我们检索了 PubMed、MEDLINE、Web of Science、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 数据库(从数据库建立之初到 2023 年 8 月 31 日),以找到有关 ACR LI-RADS 和/或改良 LI-RADS 算法的原始研究,其中 Sonazoid 用作高危肝细胞癌(HCC)患者的造影剂。采用的是双变量随机效应模型。在荟萃分析中进行了数据汇总、元回归和敏感性分析。诊断准确性研究质量评估2(QUADAS-2)工具用于评估方法学质量,Deeks漏斗图不对称检验用于评估发表偏倚:对10项研究的1,611个观察指标进行了荟萃分析。ACR LI-RADS 5类(LR-5)和改良LR-5的汇总数据分别为:汇总灵敏度为0.70[95%置信区间(CI):0.64-0.75]和0.81(95% CI:0.76-0.86)(P0.05);汇总接收者操作特征曲线下面积分别为0.84和0.91。两种算法的LI-RADS M类(LR-M)诊断性能相当。研究存在异质性:研究结果表明,与Sonazoid的ACR LR-5算法相比,改进后的LR-5算法提高了诊断灵敏度,但不同版本之间存在差异。需要进一步研究验证和探索使用 Sonazoid 的 HCC 最佳诊断标准。在进行数据库检索之前,本研究已在PROSPERO(系统性综述国际前瞻性注册;CRD42023455220)上注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The American College of Radiology contrast-enhanced ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System and its modified version in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma via Sonazoid: a meta-analysis.

Background: The American College of Radiology (ACR) developed the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) for pure blood contrast agents, but Sonazoid was not included. Modifications to LI-RADS have been proposed for Sonazoid. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to identify and compare the diagnostic efficacy of the two LI-RADS algorithms of Sonazoid.

Methods: We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from databases inception to August 31, 2023, to find original studies on the ACR LI-RADS and/or modified LI-RADS algorithm with Sonazoid used as the contrast agent in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A bivariate random-effects model was used. Data pooling, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were performed for meta-analysis. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess the methodological quality, and the Deeks funnel plot asymmetry test was used to evaluate the publication bias.

Results: A meta-analysis of 10 studies with 1,611 observations was conducted. The pooled data for ACR LI-RADS category 5 (LR-5) and modified LR-5 were respectively as follows: pooled sensitivity, 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.75] and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86) (P<0.05); pooled specificity, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.82-0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81-0.91) (P>0.05); and pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84 and 0.91. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS category M (LR-M) of the two algorithms was comparable. Study heterogeneity was observed.

Conclusions: The results indicated that modified LR-5 algorithm demonstrated improved diagnostic sensitivity compared with the ACR LR-5 algorithm of Sonazoid, with differences observed between the different versions. Further research is needed to validate and explore the optimal diagnostic criteria for HCC using Sonazoid. Before the database search was conducted, this study was registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42023455220).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery
Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
17.90%
发文量
252
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信