Longjia Zhang, Boyu Diao, Zhiyao Fan, Hanxiang Zhan
{"title":"用于区分胰腺黏液性囊性瘤和浆液性囊性瘤的放射线组学:系统综述和元分析。","authors":"Longjia Zhang, Boyu Diao, Zhiyao Fan, Hanxiang Zhan","doi":"10.1016/j.acra.2024.11.047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) differ in current standard of care, and these treatments can affect quality of life to varying degrees, a definitive preoperative diagnosis must be reliable. Current diagnostic approaches, specifically traditional cross-sectional imaging techniques, face certain limitations. But radiomics has been shown to have high diagnostic accuracy across a range of diseases. Objective to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on the use of radiomics to differentiate Mucinous Cystic Neoplasm (MCN) from Serous Cystic Neoplasm (SCN).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was comprehensively searched in Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for meta-analysis of studies that used radiomics to distinguish MCN from SCN. Risk of bias was assessed using the diagnostic accuracy study quality assessment method and combined with sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC)curve analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 884 patients from 8 studies were included in this analysis, including 365 MCN and 519 SCN. The Meta-analysis found that radiomics identified MCN and SCN with high sensitivity and specificity, with combined sensitivity and specificity of 0.84(0.82-0.87) and 0.82(0.79-0.84). The positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and the negative likelihood ratio (NLR) are 5.61(3.72, 8.47) and 0.14(0.09-0.26). In addition, the area under the SROC curve (AUC) was drawn at 0.93. No significant risk of publication bias was detected through the funnel plot analysis. The performances of feature extraction from the volume of interest (VOI) or Using AI classifier in the radiomics models were superior to those of protocols employing region of interest (ROI) or absence of AI classifier.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis demonstrates that radiomics exhibits high sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing between MCN and SCN, and has the potential to become a reliable diagnostic tool for their identification.</p>","PeriodicalId":50928,"journal":{"name":"Academic Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiomics for differentiating pancreatic Mucinous Cystic Neoplasm from Serous Cystic Neoplasm: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Longjia Zhang, Boyu Diao, Zhiyao Fan, Hanxiang Zhan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acra.2024.11.047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) differ in current standard of care, and these treatments can affect quality of life to varying degrees, a definitive preoperative diagnosis must be reliable. Current diagnostic approaches, specifically traditional cross-sectional imaging techniques, face certain limitations. But radiomics has been shown to have high diagnostic accuracy across a range of diseases. Objective to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on the use of radiomics to differentiate Mucinous Cystic Neoplasm (MCN) from Serous Cystic Neoplasm (SCN).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was comprehensively searched in Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for meta-analysis of studies that used radiomics to distinguish MCN from SCN. Risk of bias was assessed using the diagnostic accuracy study quality assessment method and combined with sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC)curve analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 884 patients from 8 studies were included in this analysis, including 365 MCN and 519 SCN. The Meta-analysis found that radiomics identified MCN and SCN with high sensitivity and specificity, with combined sensitivity and specificity of 0.84(0.82-0.87) and 0.82(0.79-0.84). The positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and the negative likelihood ratio (NLR) are 5.61(3.72, 8.47) and 0.14(0.09-0.26). In addition, the area under the SROC curve (AUC) was drawn at 0.93. No significant risk of publication bias was detected through the funnel plot analysis. The performances of feature extraction from the volume of interest (VOI) or Using AI classifier in the radiomics models were superior to those of protocols employing region of interest (ROI) or absence of AI classifier.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis demonstrates that radiomics exhibits high sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing between MCN and SCN, and has the potential to become a reliable diagnostic tool for their identification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2024.11.047\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2024.11.047","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Radiomics for differentiating pancreatic Mucinous Cystic Neoplasm from Serous Cystic Neoplasm: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Background: As pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) differ in current standard of care, and these treatments can affect quality of life to varying degrees, a definitive preoperative diagnosis must be reliable. Current diagnostic approaches, specifically traditional cross-sectional imaging techniques, face certain limitations. But radiomics has been shown to have high diagnostic accuracy across a range of diseases. Objective to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature on the use of radiomics to differentiate Mucinous Cystic Neoplasm (MCN) from Serous Cystic Neoplasm (SCN).
Methods: This study was comprehensively searched in Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for meta-analysis of studies that used radiomics to distinguish MCN from SCN. Risk of bias was assessed using the diagnostic accuracy study quality assessment method and combined with sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC)curve analysis.
Results: A total of 884 patients from 8 studies were included in this analysis, including 365 MCN and 519 SCN. The Meta-analysis found that radiomics identified MCN and SCN with high sensitivity and specificity, with combined sensitivity and specificity of 0.84(0.82-0.87) and 0.82(0.79-0.84). The positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and the negative likelihood ratio (NLR) are 5.61(3.72, 8.47) and 0.14(0.09-0.26). In addition, the area under the SROC curve (AUC) was drawn at 0.93. No significant risk of publication bias was detected through the funnel plot analysis. The performances of feature extraction from the volume of interest (VOI) or Using AI classifier in the radiomics models were superior to those of protocols employing region of interest (ROI) or absence of AI classifier.
Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrates that radiomics exhibits high sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing between MCN and SCN, and has the potential to become a reliable diagnostic tool for their identification.
期刊介绍:
Academic Radiology publishes original reports of 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, image-guided interventions and related techniques. It also includes brief technical reports describing original observations, techniques, and instrumental developments; state-of-the-art reports on clinical issues, new technology and other topics of current medical importance; meta-analyses; scientific studies and opinions on radiologic education; and letters to the Editor.