扩散模型参数和单指数表观扩散系数对前列腺癌诊断效能的比较:系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences Pub Date : 2024-07-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jrms.jrms_359_23
Hamide Nematollahi, Mohammad Reza Maracy, Masoud Moslehi, Daryoush Shahbazi-Gahrouei
{"title":"扩散模型参数和单指数表观扩散系数对前列腺癌诊断效能的比较:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Hamide Nematollahi, Mohammad Reza Maracy, Masoud Moslehi, Daryoush Shahbazi-Gahrouei","doi":"10.4103/jrms.jrms_359_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The importance of diffusion in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis has been widely proven. Several studies investigated diffusion models in PCa diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis study was performed to evaluate the ability of three diffusion models to diagnose PCa from the scientific electronic databases Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (ISI) for the period up to March 2022 to identify all relevant articles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen studies were included in the systematic review section (7 diffusion kurtosis imaging [DKI] studies, 4 diffusion tensor imaging [DTI] studies, 4 intravoxel incoherent motion [IVIM] studies, and 3 IVIM-DKI studies). Pooled sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and summary area under each diffusion model's curve (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The pooled accuracy and 95% CI on detection (differentiation of tumor from normal tissue and benign prostatic hyperplasia/prostatitis) were obtained for apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) at 87.97% (84.56%-91.38%) for DKI parameters (Gaussian diffusion [DK] 87.94% [78.71%-97.16%] and deviation from Gaussian diffusion [K] 86.84% [81.83%-91.85%]) and IVIM parameters (true molecular diffusion [DIVIM] 81.73% [72.54%-90.91%], perfusion-related diffusion [D*] 65% [48.47%-81.53%] and perfusion fraction [f] 80.36% [64.23%-96.48%]). The AUC values and 95% CI in the detection of PCa were obtained for ADC at 0.95 (0.92-0.97), for DKI parameters (DK 0.94 [0.89-0.99] and K 0.93 [0.90-0.96]) and for IVIM parameters (DIVIM 0.85 [0.80-0.91], D* 0.60 [0.43-0.77] and f 0.73 [0.63-0.84]). Two studies showed that the DTI accuracy values were 97.34% and 85%. For IVIM-kurtosis model in PCa detection, two studies stated that the DIVIM-K and KIVIM-K accuracy values were 85% and 84.44% (the pooled accuracy; 84.64% with 95% CI 75.78%-93.50%), and 72.50% and 71.11% (the pooled accuracy, 72.10% with 95% CI 64.73%-79.48%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings showed that among the DKI, IVIM, and ADC parameters, it seems that ADC, Dk, DIVIM, and K are the most important, which can be used as an indicator to distinguish PCa from normal tissue. The DKI model probably has a higher ability to detect PCa from normal tissue than the IVIM model. DKI probably has the same diagnostic performance in PCa detection and grading compared to diffusion-weighted imaging and ADC.</p>","PeriodicalId":50062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","volume":"29 ","pages":"43"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11992414/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of diagnostic performance between diffusion models parameters and mono-exponential apparent diffusion coefficient in patients with prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Hamide Nematollahi, Mohammad Reza Maracy, Masoud Moslehi, Daryoush Shahbazi-Gahrouei\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jrms.jrms_359_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The importance of diffusion in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis has been widely proven. Several studies investigated diffusion models in PCa diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis study was performed to evaluate the ability of three diffusion models to diagnose PCa from the scientific electronic databases Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (ISI) for the period up to March 2022 to identify all relevant articles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen studies were included in the systematic review section (7 diffusion kurtosis imaging [DKI] studies, 4 diffusion tensor imaging [DTI] studies, 4 intravoxel incoherent motion [IVIM] studies, and 3 IVIM-DKI studies). Pooled sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and summary area under each diffusion model's curve (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The pooled accuracy and 95% CI on detection (differentiation of tumor from normal tissue and benign prostatic hyperplasia/prostatitis) were obtained for apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) at 87.97% (84.56%-91.38%) for DKI parameters (Gaussian diffusion [DK] 87.94% [78.71%-97.16%] and deviation from Gaussian diffusion [K] 86.84% [81.83%-91.85%]) and IVIM parameters (true molecular diffusion [DIVIM] 81.73% [72.54%-90.91%], perfusion-related diffusion [D*] 65% [48.47%-81.53%] and perfusion fraction [f] 80.36% [64.23%-96.48%]). The AUC values and 95% CI in the detection of PCa were obtained for ADC at 0.95 (0.92-0.97), for DKI parameters (DK 0.94 [0.89-0.99] and K 0.93 [0.90-0.96]) and for IVIM parameters (DIVIM 0.85 [0.80-0.91], D* 0.60 [0.43-0.77] and f 0.73 [0.63-0.84]). Two studies showed that the DTI accuracy values were 97.34% and 85%. For IVIM-kurtosis model in PCa detection, two studies stated that the DIVIM-K and KIVIM-K accuracy values were 85% and 84.44% (the pooled accuracy; 84.64% with 95% CI 75.78%-93.50%), and 72.50% and 71.11% (the pooled accuracy, 72.10% with 95% CI 64.73%-79.48%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings showed that among the DKI, IVIM, and ADC parameters, it seems that ADC, Dk, DIVIM, and K are the most important, which can be used as an indicator to distinguish PCa from normal tissue. The DKI model probably has a higher ability to detect PCa from normal tissue than the IVIM model. DKI probably has the same diagnostic performance in PCa detection and grading compared to diffusion-weighted imaging and ADC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50062,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"29 \",\"pages\":\"43\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11992414/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_359_23\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jrms.jrms_359_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:弥散在前列腺癌(PCa)诊断中的重要性已被广泛证实。一些研究探讨了扩散模型在前列腺癌诊断中的应用。材料和方法:本系统综述和荟萃分析研究旨在评估三种扩散模型诊断PCa的能力,这些模型来自截至2022年3月的科学电子数据库Embase、PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science (ISI),以识别所有相关文章。结果:18项研究被纳入系统综述部分(7项扩散峰态成像[DKI]研究,4项扩散张量成像[DTI]研究,4项体素内非相干运动[IVIM]研究,3项IVIM-DKI研究)。计算每个扩散模型曲线下的综合敏感性、特异性、准确性和汇总面积(AUC)和95%置信区间(ci)。DKI参数(高斯扩散[DK] 87.94%[78.71% ~ 97.16%]和偏离高斯扩散[K] 86.84%[81.83% ~ 91.85%])和IVIM参数(真分子扩散[DIVIM] 81.73%[72.54% ~ 90.91%])的表观扩散系数(ADC)检测(肿瘤与正常组织和良性前列腺增生/前列腺炎的鉴别)的合并准确率和95% CI为87.97%(84.56% ~ 91.38%)。灌注相关弥散[D*] 65%[48.47% ~ 81.53%],灌注分数[f] 80.36%[64.23% ~ 96.48%])。ADC、DKI参数(DK 0.94[0.89-0.99]、K 0.93[0.90-0.96])和IVIM参数(DIVIM 0.85[0.80-0.91]、D* 0.60[0.43-0.77]、f 0.73[0.63-0.84])检测PCa的AUC值和95% CI均为0.95(0.92-0.97)。两项研究表明,DTI的准确率分别为97.34%和85%。对于ivim -峰度模型在PCa检测中的应用,两项研究表明DIVIM-K和KIVIM-K的准确率分别为85%和84.44%(合并准确率;分别为84.64% (95% CI 75.78% ~ 93.50%)、72.50%和71.11%(合并准确率为72.10%,95% CI 64.73% ~ 79.48%)。结论:我们的研究结果表明,在DKI、IVIM和ADC参数中,ADC、Dk、DIVIM和K似乎是最重要的,可以作为区分PCa与正常组织的指标。与IVIM模型相比,DKI模型对正常组织中PCa的检测能力可能更高。与弥散加权成像和ADC相比,DKI在PCa检测和分级方面可能具有相同的诊断性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of diagnostic performance between diffusion models parameters and mono-exponential apparent diffusion coefficient in patients with prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The importance of diffusion in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis has been widely proven. Several studies investigated diffusion models in PCa diagnosis.

Materials and methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis study was performed to evaluate the ability of three diffusion models to diagnose PCa from the scientific electronic databases Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (ISI) for the period up to March 2022 to identify all relevant articles.

Results: Eighteen studies were included in the systematic review section (7 diffusion kurtosis imaging [DKI] studies, 4 diffusion tensor imaging [DTI] studies, 4 intravoxel incoherent motion [IVIM] studies, and 3 IVIM-DKI studies). Pooled sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and summary area under each diffusion model's curve (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The pooled accuracy and 95% CI on detection (differentiation of tumor from normal tissue and benign prostatic hyperplasia/prostatitis) were obtained for apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) at 87.97% (84.56%-91.38%) for DKI parameters (Gaussian diffusion [DK] 87.94% [78.71%-97.16%] and deviation from Gaussian diffusion [K] 86.84% [81.83%-91.85%]) and IVIM parameters (true molecular diffusion [DIVIM] 81.73% [72.54%-90.91%], perfusion-related diffusion [D*] 65% [48.47%-81.53%] and perfusion fraction [f] 80.36% [64.23%-96.48%]). The AUC values and 95% CI in the detection of PCa were obtained for ADC at 0.95 (0.92-0.97), for DKI parameters (DK 0.94 [0.89-0.99] and K 0.93 [0.90-0.96]) and for IVIM parameters (DIVIM 0.85 [0.80-0.91], D* 0.60 [0.43-0.77] and f 0.73 [0.63-0.84]). Two studies showed that the DTI accuracy values were 97.34% and 85%. For IVIM-kurtosis model in PCa detection, two studies stated that the DIVIM-K and KIVIM-K accuracy values were 85% and 84.44% (the pooled accuracy; 84.64% with 95% CI 75.78%-93.50%), and 72.50% and 71.11% (the pooled accuracy, 72.10% with 95% CI 64.73%-79.48%), respectively.

Conclusion: Our findings showed that among the DKI, IVIM, and ADC parameters, it seems that ADC, Dk, DIVIM, and K are the most important, which can be used as an indicator to distinguish PCa from normal tissue. The DKI model probably has a higher ability to detect PCa from normal tissue than the IVIM model. DKI probably has the same diagnostic performance in PCa detection and grading compared to diffusion-weighted imaging and ADC.

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
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
75
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, a publication of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, is a peer-reviewed online continuous journal with print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.jmsjournal.net. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository.
×
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