正电子发射断层和灌注加权成像在脑肿瘤复发诊断中的应用

IF 1.2 4区医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

Neurosciences Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.17712/nsj.2022.3.20210146

Tareef S Daqqaq, Ayman S. Alhasan

{"title":"正电子发射断层和灌注加权成像在脑肿瘤复发诊断中的应用","authors":"Tareef S Daqqaq, Ayman S. Alhasan","doi":"10.17712/nsj.2022.3.20210146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI) and positron emission tomography (PET) in distinguishing between treatment-related changes and tumor recurrence. Methods: We carried out a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases from database inception until August 2021 for pertinent articles. Particular inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select the eligible studies. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy tool was used to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality of the eligible studies. From the included studies, the rate ratio (RR) of pooled accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and their corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for both PWI and PET. Results: The systematic review and meta-analysis comprised 14 research studies, with a total of 542 patients. Although PET revealed a moderately higher accuracy and sensitivity when compared to PWI (RR: 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.02 and RR: 0.95 95% CI 0.85-1.06, respectively), the difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Similarly, while PWI demonstrated a moderately higher specificity when compared to PET (RR:1.10, 95% CI 0.98-1.23) but. However, no statistically significant difference between the 2 modalities was detected (p>0.05). Interestingly, we revealed that 18F-FET-PET was significantly more efficient than PWI in terms of accuracy (RR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.93) and sensitivity (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) (p>0.05). Conclusion: Both PET and PWI yielded good diagnostic performance in distinguishing treatment-related changes from tumor recurrence, and neither modality seemed to be superior. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021288160","PeriodicalId":19284,"journal":{"name":"Neurosciences","volume":"27 1","pages":"131 - 142"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Positron emission tomography and perfusion weighted imaging in the detection of brain tumors recurrence\",\"authors\":\"Tareef S Daqqaq, Ayman S. Alhasan\",\"doi\":\"10.17712/nsj.2022.3.20210146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: To assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI) and positron emission tomography (PET) in distinguishing between treatment-related changes and tumor recurrence. Methods: We carried out a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases from database inception until August 2021 for pertinent articles. Particular inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select the eligible studies. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy tool was used to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality of the eligible studies. From the included studies, the rate ratio (RR) of pooled accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and their corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for both PWI and PET. Results: The systematic review and meta-analysis comprised 14 research studies, with a total of 542 patients. Although PET revealed a moderately higher accuracy and sensitivity when compared to PWI (RR: 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.02 and RR: 0.95 95% CI 0.85-1.06, respectively), the difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Similarly, while PWI demonstrated a moderately higher specificity when compared to PET (RR:1.10, 95% CI 0.98-1.23) but. However, no statistically significant difference between the 2 modalities was detected (p>0.05). Interestingly, we revealed that 18F-FET-PET was significantly more efficient than PWI in terms of accuracy (RR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.93) and sensitivity (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) (p>0.05). Conclusion: Both PET and PWI yielded good diagnostic performance in distinguishing treatment-related changes from tumor recurrence, and neither modality seemed to be superior. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021288160\",\"PeriodicalId\":19284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurosciences\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"131 - 142\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17712/nsj.2022.3.20210146\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17712/nsj.2022.3.20210146","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

目的：评估和比较灌注加权成像（PWI）和正电子发射断层扫描（PET）在区分治疗相关变化和肿瘤复发方面的诊断准确性、敏感性和特异性。方法：我们对PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Library和CINAHL数据库从数据库创建到2021年8月的相关文章进行了系统综述。采用特殊的纳入和排除标准来选择符合条件的研究。诊断准确性质量评估工具用于评估合格研究的偏倚风险和方法学质量。从纳入的研究中，对PWI和PET的合并准确性、敏感性、特异性及其相应的置信区间（CI）的比率比（RR）进行了估计。结果：系统综述和荟萃分析包括14项研究，共542名患者。尽管与PWI相比，PET显示出适度更高的准确性和敏感性（RR:0.94，95%CI 0.86-1.02和RR:0.95，95%CI为0.85-1.06），但差异无统计学意义（p>0.05）。同样，与PET相比，PWI显示出适度较高的特异性（RR:1.10，95%CI 0.98-1.23），但是。然而，两种模式之间没有统计学上的显著差异（p>0.05）。有趣的是，我们发现18F-FET-PET在准确性（RR:0.82，95%CI 0.72-0.93）和敏感性（RR:0.72，95%CI 0.62-0.83）方面显著高于PWI（p>0.05）。PROSPERO ID:CRD42021288160

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Positron emission tomography and perfusion weighted imaging in the detection of brain tumors recurrence

Objectives: To assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI) and positron emission tomography (PET) in distinguishing between treatment-related changes and tumor recurrence. Methods: We carried out a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases from database inception until August 2021 for pertinent articles. Particular inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select the eligible studies. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy tool was used to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality of the eligible studies. From the included studies, the rate ratio (RR) of pooled accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and their corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for both PWI and PET. Results: The systematic review and meta-analysis comprised 14 research studies, with a total of 542 patients. Although PET revealed a moderately higher accuracy and sensitivity when compared to PWI (RR: 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.02 and RR: 0.95 95% CI 0.85-1.06, respectively), the difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Similarly, while PWI demonstrated a moderately higher specificity when compared to PET (RR:1.10, 95% CI 0.98-1.23) but. However, no statistically significant difference between the 2 modalities was detected (p>0.05). Interestingly, we revealed that 18F-FET-PET was significantly more efficient than PWI in terms of accuracy (RR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.93) and sensitivity (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) (p>0.05). Conclusion: Both PET and PWI yielded good diagnostic performance in distinguishing treatment-related changes from tumor recurrence, and neither modality seemed to be superior. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021288160

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

Neurosciences 医学-临床神经学

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

4.5 months

期刊介绍： Neurosciences is an open access, peer-reviewed, quarterly publication. Authors are invited to submit for publication articles reporting original work related to the nervous system, e.g., neurology, neurophysiology, neuroradiology, neurosurgery, neurorehabilitation, neurooncology, neuropsychiatry, and neurogenetics, etc. Basic research withclear clinical implications will also be considered. Review articles of current interest and high standard are welcomed for consideration. Prospective workshould not be backdated. There are also sections for Case Reports, Brief Communication, Correspondence, and medical news items. To promote continuous education, training, and learning, we include Clinical Images and MCQ’s. Highlights of international and regional meetings of interest, and specialized supplements will also be considered. All submissions must conform to the Uniform Requirements.