Antonio Raffone, Diego Raimondo, Daniele Neola, Antonio Travaglino, Marisol Doglioli, Marco Ambrosio, Ivano Raimondo, Lucia De Meis, Luigi Carlo Turco, Francesco Cosentino, Renato Seracchioli, Paolo Casadio, Antonio Mollo
{"title":"子宫肉瘤妇女超声征象的患病率:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Antonio Raffone, Diego Raimondo, Daniele Neola, Antonio Travaglino, Marisol Doglioli, Marco Ambrosio, Ivano Raimondo, Lucia De Meis, Luigi Carlo Turco, Francesco Cosentino, Renato Seracchioli, Paolo Casadio, Antonio Mollo","doi":"10.1055/a-2151-9205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Five electronic databases were searched from inception to June 2022 for all studies allowing calculation of the prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma. Pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals was calculated for each sonographic sign and was a priori defined as \"very high\" when it was ≥ 80%, \"high\" when it ranged from 80% to 70%, and less relevant when it was ≤ 70%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>6 studies with 317 sarcoma patients were included. The pooled prevalence was: · 25.0% (95%CI:15.4-37.9%) for absence of visibility of the myometrium. · 80.5% (95%CI:74.8-85.2%) for solid component. · 78.3% (95%CI:59.3-89.9%) for inhomogeneous echogenicity of solid component. · 47.9% (95%CI:41.1-54.8%) for cystic areas. · 80.7% (95%CI:68.3-89.0%) for irregular walls of cystic areas. · 72.3% (95%CI:16.7-97.2%) for anechoic cystic areas. · 54.8% (95%CI:34.0-74.1%) for absence of shadowing. · 73.5% (95%CI:43.3-90.9%) for absence of calcifications. · 48.7% (95%CI:18.6-79.8%) for color score 3 or 4. · 47.3% (95%CI:37.0-57.8%) for irregular tumor borders. · 45.4% (95%CI:27.6-64.3%) for endometrial cavity not visualizable. · 10.9% (95%CI:3.5-29.1%) for free pelvic fluid. · 6.4% (95%CI:1.1-30.2%) for ascites. · 21.2% (95%CI:2.1-76.8%) for intracavitary process. · 81.5% (95%CI:56.1-93.8%) for singular lesion..</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Solid component, irregular walls of cystic areas, and singular lesions are signs with very high prevalence, while inhomogeneous echogenicity of solid component, anechoic cystic areas, and absence of calcifications are signs with high prevalence. The remaining signs were less relevant.</p>","PeriodicalId":49400,"journal":{"name":"Ultraschall in Der Medizin","volume":" ","pages":"293-304"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Raffone, Diego Raimondo, Daniele Neola, Antonio Travaglino, Marisol Doglioli, Marco Ambrosio, Ivano Raimondo, Lucia De Meis, Luigi Carlo Turco, Francesco Cosentino, Renato Seracchioli, Paolo Casadio, Antonio Mollo\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2151-9205\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Five electronic databases were searched from inception to June 2022 for all studies allowing calculation of the prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma. Pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals was calculated for each sonographic sign and was a priori defined as \\\"very high\\\" when it was ≥ 80%, \\\"high\\\" when it ranged from 80% to 70%, and less relevant when it was ≤ 70%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>6 studies with 317 sarcoma patients were included. The pooled prevalence was: · 25.0% (95%CI:15.4-37.9%) for absence of visibility of the myometrium. · 80.5% (95%CI:74.8-85.2%) for solid component. · 78.3% (95%CI:59.3-89.9%) for inhomogeneous echogenicity of solid component. · 47.9% (95%CI:41.1-54.8%) for cystic areas. · 80.7% (95%CI:68.3-89.0%) for irregular walls of cystic areas. · 72.3% (95%CI:16.7-97.2%) for anechoic cystic areas. · 54.8% (95%CI:34.0-74.1%) for absence of shadowing. · 73.5% (95%CI:43.3-90.9%) for absence of calcifications. · 48.7% (95%CI:18.6-79.8%) for color score 3 or 4. · 47.3% (95%CI:37.0-57.8%) for irregular tumor borders. · 45.4% (95%CI:27.6-64.3%) for endometrial cavity not visualizable. · 10.9% (95%CI:3.5-29.1%) for free pelvic fluid. · 6.4% (95%CI:1.1-30.2%) for ascites. · 21.2% (95%CI:2.1-76.8%) for intracavitary process. · 81.5% (95%CI:56.1-93.8%) for singular lesion..</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Solid component, irregular walls of cystic areas, and singular lesions are signs with very high prevalence, while inhomogeneous echogenicity of solid component, anechoic cystic areas, and absence of calcifications are signs with high prevalence. The remaining signs were less relevant.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ultraschall in Der Medizin\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"293-304\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ultraschall in Der Medizin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2151-9205\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ACOUSTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultraschall in Der Medizin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2151-9205","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Objective: To assess the prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma.
Materials and methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Five electronic databases were searched from inception to June 2022 for all studies allowing calculation of the prevalence of sonographic signs in women with uterine sarcoma. Pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals was calculated for each sonographic sign and was a priori defined as "very high" when it was ≥ 80%, "high" when it ranged from 80% to 70%, and less relevant when it was ≤ 70%.
Results: 6 studies with 317 sarcoma patients were included. The pooled prevalence was: · 25.0% (95%CI:15.4-37.9%) for absence of visibility of the myometrium. · 80.5% (95%CI:74.8-85.2%) for solid component. · 78.3% (95%CI:59.3-89.9%) for inhomogeneous echogenicity of solid component. · 47.9% (95%CI:41.1-54.8%) for cystic areas. · 80.7% (95%CI:68.3-89.0%) for irregular walls of cystic areas. · 72.3% (95%CI:16.7-97.2%) for anechoic cystic areas. · 54.8% (95%CI:34.0-74.1%) for absence of shadowing. · 73.5% (95%CI:43.3-90.9%) for absence of calcifications. · 48.7% (95%CI:18.6-79.8%) for color score 3 or 4. · 47.3% (95%CI:37.0-57.8%) for irregular tumor borders. · 45.4% (95%CI:27.6-64.3%) for endometrial cavity not visualizable. · 10.9% (95%CI:3.5-29.1%) for free pelvic fluid. · 6.4% (95%CI:1.1-30.2%) for ascites. · 21.2% (95%CI:2.1-76.8%) for intracavitary process. · 81.5% (95%CI:56.1-93.8%) for singular lesion..
Conclusion: Solid component, irregular walls of cystic areas, and singular lesions are signs with very high prevalence, while inhomogeneous echogenicity of solid component, anechoic cystic areas, and absence of calcifications are signs with high prevalence. The remaining signs were less relevant.
期刊介绍:
Ultraschall in der Medizin / European Journal of Ultrasound publishes scientific papers and contributions from a variety of disciplines on the diagnostic and therapeutic applications of ultrasound with an emphasis on clinical application. Technical papers with a physiological theme as well as the interaction between ultrasound and biological systems might also occasionally be considered for peer review and publication, provided that the translational relevance is high and the link with clinical applications is tight. The editors and the publishers reserve the right to publish selected articles online only. Authors are welcome to submit supplementary video material. Letters and comments are also accepted, promoting a vivid exchange of opinions and scientific discussions.