{"title":"PET与PET/CT检测腹膜癌的比较:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Jinkui Li, Ruifeng Yan, Junqiang Lei, Changqin Jiang","doi":"10.1007/s00261-015-0418-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The study aims to perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic value of FDG PET with PET/CT in detecting peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) to identify the potentially most useful diagnostic modality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A computer-aided search was performed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the China Biological Medicine Database, VIP, China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, and Wanfang databases for articles concerning diagnosis of peritoneal metastases with PET or PET/CT. QUADAS was used to evaluate the included articles' quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On a per-patient basis, the pooled sensitivity of PET/CT (84%) was significantly higher than that of PET (60%), and the pooled specificity of PET (98%) was markedly higher than that for PET/CT (94%). On a per-lesion basis, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT were 87 and 95%, respectively. Only 1 PET study on a per-lesion basis, its sensitivity is 65.8 and specificity is 94.1%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PET and PET/CT are powerful imaging techniques for detection and characterization of PC. PET/CT can be used as a screening tool and it may be acceptable to use PET as a diagnosis tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":7014,"journal":{"name":"Abdominal Imaging","volume":"40 7","pages":"2660-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00261-015-0418-8","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of PET with PET/CT in detecting peritoneal carcinomatosis: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jinkui Li, Ruifeng Yan, Junqiang Lei, Changqin Jiang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00261-015-0418-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The study aims to perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic value of FDG PET with PET/CT in detecting peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) to identify the potentially most useful diagnostic modality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A computer-aided search was performed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the China Biological Medicine Database, VIP, China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, and Wanfang databases for articles concerning diagnosis of peritoneal metastases with PET or PET/CT. QUADAS was used to evaluate the included articles' quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On a per-patient basis, the pooled sensitivity of PET/CT (84%) was significantly higher than that of PET (60%), and the pooled specificity of PET (98%) was markedly higher than that for PET/CT (94%). On a per-lesion basis, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT were 87 and 95%, respectively. Only 1 PET study on a per-lesion basis, its sensitivity is 65.8 and specificity is 94.1%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PET and PET/CT are powerful imaging techniques for detection and characterization of PC. PET/CT can be used as a screening tool and it may be acceptable to use PET as a diagnosis tool.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7014,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Abdominal Imaging\",\"volume\":\"40 7\",\"pages\":\"2660-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00261-015-0418-8\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Abdominal Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0418-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Abdominal Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0418-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26
摘要
目的:本研究旨在进行荟萃分析，比较FDG PET与PET/CT在检测腹膜癌(PC)中的诊断价值，以确定潜在最有用的诊断方式。方法:计算机辅助检索Cochrane图书馆、PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science、中国生物医学数据库、VIP、中国国家知识基础设施数据库和万方数据库中与PET或PET/CT诊断腹膜转移相关的文章。采用QUADAS评价纳入文献的质量。结果:在单个患者的基础上，PET/CT的合并敏感性(84%)显著高于PET (60%)， PET的合并特异性(98%)显著高于PET/CT(94%)。在每个病灶的基础上，PET/CT的敏感性和特异性分别为87%和95%。仅对单个病灶进行1次PET检查，其敏感性为65.8，特异性为94.1%。结论:PET和PET/CT是检测和表征PC的有力成像技术。PET/CT可以作为筛查工具，也可以作为诊断工具。
Comparison of PET with PET/CT in detecting peritoneal carcinomatosis: a meta-analysis.
Purpose: The study aims to perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic value of FDG PET with PET/CT in detecting peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) to identify the potentially most useful diagnostic modality.
Methods: A computer-aided search was performed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the China Biological Medicine Database, VIP, China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, and Wanfang databases for articles concerning diagnosis of peritoneal metastases with PET or PET/CT. QUADAS was used to evaluate the included articles' quality.
Results: On a per-patient basis, the pooled sensitivity of PET/CT (84%) was significantly higher than that of PET (60%), and the pooled specificity of PET (98%) was markedly higher than that for PET/CT (94%). On a per-lesion basis, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT were 87 and 95%, respectively. Only 1 PET study on a per-lesion basis, its sensitivity is 65.8 and specificity is 94.1%.
Conclusions: PET and PET/CT are powerful imaging techniques for detection and characterization of PC. PET/CT can be used as a screening tool and it may be acceptable to use PET as a diagnosis tool.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
