人工智能在磁共振成像中预测直肠癌患者淋巴结转移:荟萃分析。

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
European Radiology Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-12 DOI:10.1007/s00330-025-11519-y
Zhiqiang Bai, Lumin Xu, Zujun Ding, Yi Cao, Zepeng Wang, Wenjie Yang, Wei Xu, Hang Li
{"title":"人工智能在磁共振成像中预测直肠癌患者淋巴结转移:荟萃分析。","authors":"Zhiqiang Bai, Lumin Xu, Zujun Ding, Yi Cao, Zepeng Wang, Wenjie Yang, Wei Xu, Hang Li","doi":"10.1007/s00330-025-11519-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based artificial intelligence (AI) in the preoperative detection of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in patients with rectal cancer and to compare it with the diagnostic performance of radiologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A thorough literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies published up to September 2024. The selected studies focused on the diagnostic performance of MRI-based AI in detecting rectal cancer LNM. A bivariate random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, each reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Furthermore, the modified quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool was applied to assess the methodological quality of the selected studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for MRI-based AI in detecting preoperative LNM in rectal cancer were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.74), 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75), and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80), respectively. For radiologists, these values were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.49-0.77), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.62-0.80), and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.80). Both analyses showed no significant publication bias (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MRI-based AI demonstrates diagnostic performance similar to that of radiologists. The high heterogeneity among studies limits the strength of these findings, and further research with external validation datasets is necessary to confirm the results and assess their practical clinical value.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question How effective is MRI-based AI in detecting LNM in rectal cancer patients compared to traditional radiology methods? Findings The diagnostic performance of MRI-based AI is comparable to radiologists, with pooled sensitivity and specificity both at 0.71, indicating moderate accuracy. Clinical relevance Integrating MRI-based AI can enhance diagnostic efficiency in identifying LNM, especially in settings with limited access to skilled radiologists, but requires further validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"6193-6206"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence in magnetic resonance imaging for predicting lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer patients: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Zhiqiang Bai, Lumin Xu, Zujun Ding, Yi Cao, Zepeng Wang, Wenjie Yang, Wei Xu, Hang Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00330-025-11519-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based artificial intelligence (AI) in the preoperative detection of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in patients with rectal cancer and to compare it with the diagnostic performance of radiologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A thorough literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies published up to September 2024. The selected studies focused on the diagnostic performance of MRI-based AI in detecting rectal cancer LNM. A bivariate random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, each reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Furthermore, the modified quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool was applied to assess the methodological quality of the selected studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for MRI-based AI in detecting preoperative LNM in rectal cancer were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.74), 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75), and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80), respectively. For radiologists, these values were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.49-0.77), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.62-0.80), and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.80). Both analyses showed no significant publication bias (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MRI-based AI demonstrates diagnostic performance similar to that of radiologists. The high heterogeneity among studies limits the strength of these findings, and further research with external validation datasets is necessary to confirm the results and assess their practical clinical value.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question How effective is MRI-based AI in detecting LNM in rectal cancer patients compared to traditional radiology methods? Findings The diagnostic performance of MRI-based AI is comparable to radiologists, with pooled sensitivity and specificity both at 0.71, indicating moderate accuracy. Clinical relevance Integrating MRI-based AI can enhance diagnostic efficiency in identifying LNM, especially in settings with limited access to skilled radiologists, but requires further validation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"6193-6206\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11519-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11519-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本荟萃分析旨在评价基于磁共振成像(MRI)的人工智能(AI)在直肠癌患者淋巴结转移(LNM)术前检测中的诊断性能,并与放射科医生的诊断性能进行比较。方法:在PubMed、Embase和Web of Science上进行全面的文献检索,以确定截至2024年9月发表的相关研究。所选研究的重点是基于mri的人工智能在检测直肠癌LNM中的诊断性能。采用双变量随机效应模型计算合并敏感性和特异性,每项均以95%置信区间(ci)报告。采用I2统计量评估研究异质性。此外,采用改进的诊断准确性研究质量评估-2 (QUADAS-2)工具评估所选研究的方法学质量。结果:本荟萃分析纳入了17项研究。mri人工智能检测直肠癌术前LNM的综合敏感性、特异性和曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.74)、0.71 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75)和0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80)。对于放射科医生,这些值分别为0.64 (95% CI: 0.49-0.77)、0.72 (95% CI: 0.62-0.80)和0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.80)。两项分析均未显示显著的发表偏倚(p < 0.05)。结论:基于核磁共振的人工智能的诊断能力与放射科医生相似。研究之间的高度异质性限制了这些发现的强度,需要进一步的外部验证数据集的研究来确认结果并评估其实际临床价值。与传统的放射学方法相比,基于mri的人工智能在检测直肠癌患者LNM方面的效果如何?基于mri的人工智能诊断性能与放射科医生相当,敏感性和特异性均为0.71,表明准确性中等。整合基于mri的人工智能可以提高识别LNM的诊断效率,特别是在缺乏熟练放射科医生的情况下,但需要进一步验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Artificial intelligence in magnetic resonance imaging for predicting lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer patients: a meta-analysis.

Objective: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based artificial intelligence (AI) in the preoperative detection of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in patients with rectal cancer and to compare it with the diagnostic performance of radiologists.

Methods: A thorough literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies published up to September 2024. The selected studies focused on the diagnostic performance of MRI-based AI in detecting rectal cancer LNM. A bivariate random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, each reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Study heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Furthermore, the modified quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool was applied to assess the methodological quality of the selected studies.

Results: Seventeen studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for MRI-based AI in detecting preoperative LNM in rectal cancer were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.74), 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75), and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80), respectively. For radiologists, these values were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.49-0.77), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.62-0.80), and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.80). Both analyses showed no significant publication bias (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: MRI-based AI demonstrates diagnostic performance similar to that of radiologists. The high heterogeneity among studies limits the strength of these findings, and further research with external validation datasets is necessary to confirm the results and assess their practical clinical value.

Key points: Question How effective is MRI-based AI in detecting LNM in rectal cancer patients compared to traditional radiology methods? Findings The diagnostic performance of MRI-based AI is comparable to radiologists, with pooled sensitivity and specificity both at 0.71, indicating moderate accuracy. Clinical relevance Integrating MRI-based AI can enhance diagnostic efficiency in identifying LNM, especially in settings with limited access to skilled radiologists, but requires further validation.

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
European Radiology
European Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
874
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field. This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies. From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.
×
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