MRI和超声对产前胎盘植入诊断价值的Meta分析

目的通过Meta分析对MRI和超声对产前胎盘植入的诊断价值进行系统评价。方法检索PubMed、Web of Science、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网、维普、万方数据库中建库至2018年7月8日公开发表的有关MRI和超声对产前胎盘植入诊断研究的中、英文文献。对纳入文献进行数据提取和质量评估后,采用Stata15.1统计软件进行随机效应模型的Meta分析。计算所纳入研究的合并敏感度、合并特异度、合并阳性似然比、合并阴性似然比、合并诊断比值比以及相对应的95%可信区间(CI),绘制森林图和合并受试者操作特征(SROC)曲线,并计算SROC曲线下面积(AUC)。采用I2评估研究之间的统计学异质性。结果共纳入30项研究,总样本病例数2 266例。MRI对产前胎盘植入诊断的合并敏感度、合并特异度、合并阳性似然比、合并阴性似然比、合并诊断比值比、AUC分别为0.83(95%CI:0.79～0.87)、0.90(95%CI:0.84～0.94)、8.6(95%CI:5.2～14.2)、0.18(95%CI:0.14～0.24)、47(95%CI:24～91)、0.91(0.88～0.93)。US的上述相应的诊断指标值分别为0.81(95%CI:0.76～0.85)、0.88(95%CI:0.82～0.92)、6.6(95%CI:4.5～9.8)、0.22(95%CI:0.17～0.28)、31(95%CI:18～52)、0.90(0.87～0.92)。MRI和US诊断的敏感度和特异度均有较高异质性(I~2均50%,P均0.001)。Deek漏斗图提示存在发表偏倚(MRI,P=0.021;US,P=0.049)。结论 MRI对产前胎盘植入的诊断价值略高于超声,是其临床评估的一种有效且无创的检查方法。     

DCE-MRI联合MIP及乳腺钼靶X线摄影对乳腺非肿块样强化病变的诊断价值

目的 ：探讨动态对比增强MRI(DCE-MRI)联合MIP及乳腺钼靶X线摄影对乳腺非肿块样强化病变的鉴别诊断价值。方法：选取54例行DCE-MRI及乳腺钼靶X线摄影且经穿刺或手术病理证实的乳腺非肿块样强化患者为研究对象,分析DCE-MRI特征、MIP图像中的邻近血管征及乳腺钼靶X线摄影表现;以病理结果为金标准,评价各种检查方法 单独应用及联合应用对非肿块样强化病变良恶性的鉴别诊断效能。结果：54例中病理为恶性33例,良性21例。DCE-MRI的诊断敏感度75.8%,特异度76.2%,阳性预测值83.3%,阴性预测值66.7%,总符合率75.9%,约登指数0.52。DCE-MRI+MIP的诊断敏感度84.8%,特异度85.7%,阳性预测值90.3%,阴性预测值78.3%,总符合率85.2%,约登指数0.71。乳腺钼靶X线摄影的诊断敏感度30.3%,特异度95.2%,阳性预测值90.9%,阴性预测值46.5%,总符合率55.6%,约登指数0.26。DCE-MRI及MIP联合乳腺钼靶X线摄影的诊断敏感度96.9%,特异度90.5%,阳性预测值94.1%,阴性预测值95.0%,总符合率94.4...     

MRI、钼靶和超声对乳腺非肿块样强化病变诊断的对比研究

目的 探讨MRI、钼靶和超声检测乳腺非肿块样强化(NMLE)病灶的效能.资料与方法 以病理诊断为“金标准”,分析80例NMLE病灶的MRI、钼靶和超声的诊断效能,分析三者的主要影像特征.结果 病理结果51例恶性,29例良性.钼靶、超声和MRI鉴别乳腺良、恶性病变的敏感度分别为41.2％、37.3％和88.2％,特异度分别为96.6％、93.1％和62.1％.钼靶判断乳腺癌的主要依据为钙化,超声判断依据为低回声区中的异常血流和钙化.结论 超声和钼靶检测NMLE病变的敏感度低,容易漏诊;MRI的敏感度高.超声的血流和钼靶的钙化信息对鉴别诊断有帮助.     

见微知著 感知精华 ——全超越全科研磁共振Ingenia CX

目的采用Meta分析评价动态增强MRI定量参数在乳腺癌新辅助化疗(NAC)疗效评估中的价值。方法检索Pub Med、PMC、OVID-MEDLINE、中国知网、万方和维普数据库中建库至2016年11月1日公开发表的有关动态增强MRI定量评估乳腺癌NAC疗效的中英文文献,提取文献中MRI定量评估乳腺癌化疗疗效的敏感度与特异度,用Meta-Di Sc1.4软件对评价疗效的敏感度、特异度进行Meta分析,绘制森林图和合并受试者操作特征(SROC)曲线。结果共纳入国内外文献17篇,乳腺癌总病灶数854例,以病理诊断为金标准判断NAC治疗有效255例,治疗无效599例;Meta分析结果显示14篇动态增强MRI定量参数(Ktrans、kep、ve)综合评估乳腺癌NAC疗效的敏感度为83.3%(95%CI:78.3%~87.6%),特异度为82.9%(95%CI:79.5%~85.6%),SROC曲线下面积为89.99%(95%CI:85.70%~94.28%)。4篇单独用容量转移常数(Ktrans)值评估NAC疗效的敏感度、特异度分别为83.6%(95%CI:71.2%~92.2%)、81.6%(95%CI:71.0%~89.5%),SROC曲线下面积为89.99%(95%CI:83.33%~96.65%)。结论动态增强MRI定量参数对乳腺癌NAC疗效的评价具有较高的敏感度和特异度。     

DCE-MRI定量分析对乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效评估价值的Meta分析

目的采用Meta分析评价动态增强MRI定量参数在乳腺癌新辅助化疗(NAC)疗效评估中的价值。方法检索Pub Med、PMC、OVID-MEDLINE、中国知网、万方和维普数据库中建库至2016年11月1日公开发表的有关动态增强MRI定量评估乳腺癌NAC疗效的中英文文献,提取文献中MRI定量评估乳腺癌化疗疗效的敏感度与特异度,用Meta-Di Sc1.4软件对评价疗效的敏感度、特异度进行Meta分析,绘制森林图和合并受试者操作特征(SROC)曲线。结果共纳入国内外文献17篇,乳腺癌总病灶数854例,以病理诊断为金标准判断NAC治疗有效255例,治疗无效599例;Meta分析结果显示14篇动态增强MRI定量参数(Ktrans、kep、ve)综合评估乳腺癌NAC疗效的敏感度为83.3%(95%CI:78.3%~87.6%),特异度为82.9%(95%CI:79.5%~85.6%),SROC曲线下面积为89.99%(95%CI:85.70%~94.28%)。4篇单独用容量转移常数(Ktrans)值评估NAC疗效的敏感度、特异度分别为83.6%(95%CI:71.2%~92.2%)、81.6%(95%CI:71.0%~89.5%),SROC曲线下面积为89.99%(95%CI:83.33%~96.65%)。结论动态增强MRI定量参数对乳腺癌NAC疗效的评价具有较高的敏感度和特异度。     

CTA对于诊断外伤性四肢动脉损伤的Meta分析

【摘要】目的：探讨CTA对急性四肢动脉损伤的诊断效果。方法：检索PubMed、EBSCO、Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews、CNKI等数据库,筛查相关研究文献,运用QUSDAS-2工具对研究对象进行系统评价,提取纳入文献的真、假阳性数,真、假阴性数,进行异质性检测,合并统计量,绘制受试者工作特征曲线（SROC）。结果：本研究共纳入文献9篇,纳入文献均表现为较高质量、较低偏倚风险和临床适用性风险。合并灵敏度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断OR值分别为0.98（95%CI：0.96~1.00）、0.99(95%CI:0.97~1.00)、33.09（95%CI：15.75~69.53）、0.04（95%CI：0.02~0.07）、1100.47（95%CI：376.48~3216.73）。SROC下面积为0.99,Q 指数为0.9689。结论：CTA对于创伤性四肢动脉损伤的诊断具有较高的敏感度和特异度,可以作为四肢外伤术前筛查血管损伤的有效方法。     

DWI联合增强MRI对肝硬化背景下小肝癌诊断价值的Meta分析

目的 应用Meta分析评价磁共振弥散加权成像（DWI）联合增强MRI对肝硬化背景下小肝癌的诊断价值。 方法 检索PubMed、Web of Science、中国学术期刊网全文数据库、万方数据库、中文科技期刊数据库（VIP）,按纳入和排除标准收集2000年1月至2017年12月的文献。采用诊断性试验质量评价表（QUADAS）进行诊断性试验的评价。使用Meta-Disc 1.4及Stata 12.0软件进行统计学分析,采用χ2检验对各研究的诊断比值比（DOR）进行异质性检验,用I2评估异质性的大小。通过综合受试者工作特征（SROC）曲线及Spearman相关系数检验纳入文献是否存在阈值效应,根据异质性检测结果选择合适的效应模型,通过计算合并灵敏度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、DOR、SROC曲线下面积评价DWI联合增强MRI对肝硬化背景下小肝癌的诊断准确率。 结果 共纳入文献7篇,均为英文文献,包含836例患者,共计1112个病灶。异质性I2=76.6%,这表明纳入的文献有高度异质性,Spearman检验r=?0.14（P=0.76）,这说明不存在由阈值效应导致的异质性。DWI联合增强MRI对肝硬化背景下小肝癌的诊断价值的合并灵敏度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、DOR分别为0.90（95%CI:0.88～0.92）、0.90（95% CI:0.86～0.93）、7.09（95%CI:3.40～14.80）、0.13（95% CI:0.08～0.21）、64.15（95% CI:24.22～169.88）。SROC曲线下面积为0.95。 结论 DWI联合增强MRI对肝硬化背景下小肝癌的诊断具有较高的灵敏度和特异度,可为肝硬化背景下小肝癌的早期诊断及早期治疗提供重要的依据。     

3.0T MRI成像技术与CR钼靶X线成像技术在乳腺癌诊断中的应用价值对照

目的:探讨3.0 T MRI与CR钼靶X线对乳腺癌诊断的价值。方法:收集46例乳腺病变患者,术前均行MRI、CR钼靶检查,均经手术病理证实。结果:46例患者中(57个病灶),乳腺癌30例(34个病灶),乳腺良性病变16例(23个病灶)。钼靶诊断乳腺癌的敏感度、特异度、准确度分别为70.59%,82.61%,75.44%;MRI诊断乳腺癌的敏感度、特异度、准确度分别为94.12%,78.26%,87.72%。结论:3.0 T MRI诊断乳腺癌的敏感度、准确度均高于CR钼靶检查,而特异度低于钼靶。     

CTE、CE、SBFT、MRE对小肠克罗恩病的诊断性系统评价

目的评价CTE(包括CT肠造影法和CT肠动描记法)、胶囊内镜(CE)、MR肠动描记法(MRE)及小肠钡餐(SBFT)对小肠克罗恩病(CD)的诊断准确度。方法遵循PICO原则检索Medline(1960~2010),PubMed,CBM,EMBASE,CCTR,Cochrane Library等数据库,并结合手工检索,纳入评估或比较CTE、CE、SBFT、MRE对克罗恩病的前瞻或回顾性诊断试验。根据QUADAS质量评价标准评价纳入文献的质量。检测上述方法的合并敏感度(SEN)、合并特异度(SPE)、合并阳性似然比(+LR)、合并阴性似然比(-LR)及概括性受试者特征性工作曲线(SROC)下面积。结果共纳入文献9篇,共计360例。参考标准包括:①内镜、组织病理技术及影像学方法;②回结肠镜+手术或病理活检结果。分别有4项及5项研究以①和②作为参考标准,其SEN分别为0.77(95%CI0.69~0.84)、0.86(95%CI 0.80~0.90),SPE分别为0.81(95%CI 0.72~0.88)、0.97(95%CI 0.89~1.00),+LR分别为3.44(95%CI1.61~7.32)1、4.67(95%CI 5.31~40.50),-LR分别为0.30(95%CI 0.18~0.50)、0.16(95%CI 0.11~0.22),SROC曲线下面积分别为0.8762和0.8429。其中CTE对克罗恩病的敏感度及特异度之和最大,然后依次为SBFT、MRE和CE。结论在所比较的4种检查技术中,CTE对小肠克罗恩病的诊断准确度最高。     

基于冠状动脉CTA的血流储备分数对冠心病心肌缺血诊断价值的Meta分析

【摘要】目的：采用Meta分析评估基于冠状动脉CTA的血流储备分数（FFRCT）对冠心病心肌缺血的诊断价值。方法：检索Pubmed、Medline、Embase、中国知网、万方、维普数据库中自建库至2018年7月关于FFRCT诊断冠心病心肌缺血的中英文文献。以FFR≤0.8为心肌缺血阈值，按照诊断试验的纳入和排除标准筛选文献，进行质量评价并提取特征信息,数据分析采用Meta-Disc1.4软件和Stata12.0软件，根据异质性检验结果选择相应效应模式，汇总诊断效应量并绘制受试者工作特征曲线（SROC）。结果：共纳入中英文文献10篇，纳入研究的患者共830例，血管1793支，不存在发表偏倚（P＞0.05）。在血管水平汇总后的敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断比值比及95%可信区间（95%CI）分别为0.84(0.81~0.87)、0.76（0.74~ 0.79）、3.76(2.69~5.26)、0.22（0.17~0.29）、19.03（10.48~34.54），汇总SROC曲线下面积为0.89；在患者水平汇总后的敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断比值比及95%可信区间（95%CI）分别为0.89(0.85~ 0.92)、0.72(0.67~ 0.76)、3.00（2.60~ 3.47）、0.16（0.12~0.22）、19.69 (13.40~ 28.93)，汇总SROC曲线下面积为0.91。结论：以FFR≤0.8为心肌缺血阈值，在血管水平和患者水平上FFRCT诊断冠心病心肌缺血均有较高的诊断准确度，FFRCT可以作为一种无创性筛查冠心病患者心肌缺血的有效手段。     

MRI膀胱影像报告和数据系统诊断肌层浸润性膀胱癌的Meta分析

目的 通过Meta分析探讨MRI膀胱影像报告和数据系统（VI-RADS）对肌层浸润性膀胱癌（MIBC）的诊断效能。 方法 检索PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Ebsco、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网、万方及维普数据库2018年1月1日—2020年4月11日有关VI-RADS诊断MIBC的中英文文献。对纳入文献进行数据提取和质量评估后,采用Stata15.1统计软件计算所纳入研究的合并敏感度、合并特异度、合并阳性似然比、合并阴性似然比及诊断比值比。绘制森林图和综合受试者操作特征（SROC）曲线,并计算相应曲线下面积（AUC）。采用I ²评估文献之间的异质性大小。采用回归分析和亚组分析探讨异质性来源。 结果 最终纳入12项国内外研究,包括1 508例病人（共1 624个病灶）。纳入研究的合并敏感度、合并特异度、合并阳性似然比、合并阴性似然比、诊断试验比值比及SROC曲线下面积分别为0.85（95%CI：0.81~0.88）、0.92（95%CI：0.89~0.94）、11.1（95%CI：8.0~15.2）、0.16（95%CI：0.13~0.21）、68（95%CI：44~106）及0.89（95%CI：0.85~0.91）。Meta回归分析显示,MRI场强（P=0.01）与诊断阈值（P=0.01）可能为异质性来源。亚组分析结果显示,使用3.0 T MR时VI-RADS诊断MIBC的合并敏感度及特异度均高于使用1.5 T或1.5 T/3.0 T MR。以VI-RADS≥3分为阈值诊断MIBC的合并敏感度高于VI-RADS≥4分,合并特异度则低于VI-RADS≥4分。Deek’s漏斗图提示纳入研究不存在明显发表偏倚（P=0.41）。 结论 MRI VI-RADS评分对MIBC的诊断具有较高的敏感度和特异度。     

钼靶及MRI纹理分析技术在乳腺良恶性病灶的诊断价值

目的:探讨综合乳腺MRI多个序列、钼靶联合MRI纹理分析对乳腺良、恶性病灶的诊断价值.方法:搜集本院2014年6月-2019年12月116例乳腺钼靶图像(恶性57例,良性59例)及96例乳腺MRI(恶性45例,良性51例)的横轴面T2 WI脂肪抑制序列、DWI及增强后的第2、3期(C2、C3)图像进行回顾性纹理分析,其...     

钼靶X线、超声组合BI-RADS分类法指导农村妇女乳腺普查

目的:探讨应用钼钯X线(MAM)、超声(US)组合BI-RADS分类法确定农村妇女乳腺癌普查年龄的可行性。方法:954例本地区农村妇女,年龄35～60岁,平均(47.5±5.8)岁。所有妇女均接受US和MAM检查并行BI-RADS分类,US+MAM组合分类结果为每例受检者US与MAM分类结果中的最高级别,US+MAM分类Ⅲ类以上结果判定为高危人群并随访。将954例农村妇女及所检出的高危妇女划分为35～40岁、41～50岁、51～60岁3个年龄段,计算高危妇女在其相应年龄段所占比率,统计学分析其差异。结果:44例农村妇女被组合BI-RADS分类法评价为高危妇女,其随访结果与BI-RADS要求相符,35～40岁、41～50岁、51～60岁3个年龄段高危妇女所占比率分别为8.21%、5.32%、1.70%,其差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:应用US+MAM组合法BI-RADS分类可准确判定农村妇女乳腺癌的普查年龄。     

Detection of Contralateral Breast Cancer Using Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Women with Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: Comparison with Combined Mammography and Whole-Breast Ultrasound

ObjectiveTo compare the screening performance of diffusion-weighted (DW) MRI and combined mammography and ultrasound (US) in detecting clinically occult contralateral breast cancer in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer.Materials and MethodsBetween January 2017 and July 2018, 1148 women (mean age ± standard deviation, 53.2 ± 10.8 years) with unilateral breast cancer and no clinical abnormalities in the contralateral breast underwent 3T MRI, digital mammography, and radiologist-performed whole-breast US. In this retrospective study, three radiologists independently and blindly reviewed all DW MR images (b = 1000 s/mm² and apparent diffusion coefficient map) of the contralateral breast and assigned a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category. For combined mammography and US evaluation, prospectively assessed results were used. Using histopathology or 1-year follow-up as the reference standard, cancer detection rate and the patient percentage with cancers detected among all women recommended for tissue diagnosis (positive predictive value; PPV₂) were compared.ResultsOf the 30 cases of clinically occult contralateral cancers (13 invasive and 17 ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]), DW MRI detected 23 (76.7%) cases (11 invasive and 12 DCIS), whereas combined mammography and US detected 12 (40.0%, five invasive and seven DCIS) cases. All cancers detected by combined mammography and US, except two DCIS cases, were detected by DW MRI. The cancer detection rate of DW MRI (2.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3%, 3.0%) was higher than that of combined mammography and US (1.0%; 95% CI: 0.5%, 1.8%; p = 0.009). DW MRI showed higher PPV₂ (42.1%; 95% CI: 26.3%, 59.2%) than combined mammography and US (18.5%; 95% CI: 9.9%, 30.0%; p = 0.001).ConclusionIn women with newly diagnosed breast cancer, DW MRI detected significantly more contralateral breast cancers with fewer biopsy recommendations than combined mammography and US.     

Diagnostic imaging of lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic, ultrasonographic and MR findings

PURPOSE: To evaluate the most frequent mammographic, US and MR findings of invasive lobular carcinoma and the role of MRI in defining multifocality and/or multicentricity of this tumor histotype. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We studied 45 lobular carcinomas (39 patients) were selected from 421 breast cancers. Core biopsy with a 14 G needle was performed in 39 cases, under US guidance in 36/39 and under mammographic guidance in 3/39 cases. Surgical biopsy was performed in 2 cases and the diagnosis could be made only after mastectomy in 5 cases. All patients were examined with mammography and US and (10-13 MHz) and 8 also with MRI. RESULTS: 28/46 palpable lesions (60.9%). Core biopsy correctly diagnosed 38/39 lesions (97.4%). The most frequent mammographic findings was that of a nodular opacity without microcalcifications (34.8%), followed by a mass with spiculated borders (30.4%). Microcalcifications were seen in one case only (2.2%). Mammography detected no abnormalities in 15.2% of cases, but US showed a lesion in 2 of these cases. The most frequent US pattern was that of a hypoechoic lesion (43.5%), followed by posterior US beam attenuation. No US signs of abnormality were seen 15.2%. MRI correctly detected 13 lesions. Contrast enhancement was greater than 70% at one minute in 10 cases and greater than 40% in one case; two lesions exhibited atypical slow contrast enhancement, peaking at 5 minutes. MRI detected 5 lesions missed at both mammography and US and showed multifocal (3 and 2) lesions where the other techniques had detected one lesion only. DISCUSSION: At mammography and US invasive lobular carcinoma exhibits no different features than ductal carcinoma but is difficult to identify especially in its early stages. US is a useful tool especially to characterize mammography-detected lesions but in our experience it also demonstrated 2 lesions missed at mammography. MRI is a precious examination to define the multifocal, multicentric or bilateral character of invasive lobular carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast is often very difficult to diagnose. Thus, we suggest the use of integrated diagnostic imaging with mammography, US and, in some cases, MRI for earlier diagnosis and to identify further tumor localizations.     

Comparison of the diagnostic performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), ultrasound and mammography for detection of breast cancer based on tumor type,breast density and patient's history: A review

ObjectiveBreast cancer is the most common malignancy in women. Mammography and ultrasound are commonly used in a clinical environment as the first choice for breast cancer detection. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) has been reported to reveal additional information. In the following review MRI, Ultrasound (US) and Mammography (MM) are all compared in terms of their diagnostic performance on breast cancer detection, depending on tumor type, breast density and patient's history.Key findingsEvaluating each modality alone, MRI provided an overall sensitivity and specificity of 94.6% (range 85.7%–100%) and 74.2% (range 25%–100%) respectively, while mammography showed that the overall sensitivity was at 54.5% (range 27%–86.8%) and specificity was 85.5% (range 62.9%–98.8%). The overall sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound was 67.2% (range 26.9%–87.5%) and 76.8% (range 18.8%–96.9%). When combining the results of all three techniques, it resulted in a sensitivity of 97.7% (range 95%–100%) and a specificity of 63.3% (range 37.1%–87.5%). In addition, contrast-enhanced mammography (CE-MM) and MRI (CE-MRI) illustrated an overall sensitivity and specificity for CE-MM was 90.5% (range 80.9%–100%) and 52.6% (range 15%–76.1%) and for CE-MRI, the overall sensitivity and specificity was 91.5% (range 89.1%–93.8%) and 64.7% (range 43.7%–85.7%).ConclusionAs modalities alone, the highest sensitivity has been observed for MRI and the lowest sensitivity for mammography regardless breast type, density, and history. Sensitivity is even more increased from the combination of US + MRI or MM + MRI or MRI + MM + US. The specificity seems to be affected by the size, type of the tumor and patient's history, however based on breast density, the highest specificity was observed by US alone.Implications for practiceBreast cancer screening is of outmost importance and identifying the best technique will improve cancer management. Combining techniques increases diagnostic ability compared with using modalities alone. CE-MM can be a viable option in dense breast tissue when there are contraindications to MRI as it also has high sensitivity based on the type of breast cancer.     

Automated analysis of contrast enhancement in breast MRI lesions using mean shift clustering for ROI selection

PURPOSE: To evaluate a new method for automated determination of a region of interest (ROI) for the analysis of contrast enhancement in breast MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mean shift multidimensional clustering (MS-MDC) was employed to divide 92 lesions into several spatially contiguous clusters each, based on multiple enhancement parameters. The ROIs were defined as the clusters with the highest probability of malignancy. The performance of enhancement analysis within these ROIs was estimated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC), and compared against a radiologist's final assessment and a classifier using histogram analysis (HA). For HA, the first, second, and third quartiles were evaluated. RESULTS: MS-MDC resulted in AUC = 0.88 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.81-0.95. The AUC for the radiologist's assessment was 0.93 (95%CI = 0.87-0.97). Best HA performance was found using the first quartile, with AUC = 0.79 (95%CI = 0.69-0.88). There was no significant difference between MS-MDC and the radiologist (P = 0.40). The improvement of MS-MDC over HA was significant (P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Mean shift clustering followed by automated selection of the most suspicious cluster resulted in accurate ROIs in breast MRI lesions.     

基于MRI影像组学评估肝细胞癌微血管侵犯的Meta分析

目的 通过Meta分析系统评价基于MRI影像组学术前评估肝细胞癌（HCC）微血管侵犯（MVI）的诊断效能。 方法 检索PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE、Web of Science、中国知网和万方数据库,检索时间为自建库以来至2021年3月公开发表的有关MRI影像组学评估HCC MVI的临床研究的中英文文献。根据纳入和排除标准对文献进行筛选并提取数据。根据诊断准确性研究质量评价工具-2（QUADAS-2）评价纳入文献的质量,采用RevMan5.4评价偏倚风险及临床适用性。采用Stata15.1软件计算纳入研究的合并敏感度、合并特异度、合并阳性似然比、合并阴性似然比及合并诊断比值比。绘制森林图和总受试者操作特征（SROC）曲线,并计算曲线下面积（AUC）。采用不一致指数（I²）和Chochrane Q指数评估异质性,并采用阈值效应和敏感性分析探讨异质性来源。采用Stata15.1软件绘制漏斗图评估是否存在发表偏倚。 结果 共纳入10项研究,包括817例病人,纳入研究的合并敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断比值比及AUC值分别为0.82（95%CI：0.76~0.87）、0.84（95%CI：0.77~0.89）、5.1（95%CI：3.4~7.7）、0.22（95%CI：0.16~0.29）、24（95%CI：13~44）和0.89（95%CI：0.86~0.91）。敏感度的I²为27.37%,特异度的I²为62.19%,纳入研究间异质性较大。Deek’s漏斗图显示不存在发表偏倚（P=0.83）。 结论 基于MRI影像组学术前预测HCC 的MVI有较高的准确性,可作为术前预测HCC MVI的一种无创性方法。     

Graded compression ultrasonography and computed tomography in acute colonic diverticulitis: Meta-analysis of test accuracy

The purpose was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of graded compression ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing acute colonic diverticulitis (ACD) in suspected patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy of CT and US in diagnosing ACD. Study quality was assessed with the QUADAS tool. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random effects model. Six US studies evaluated 630 patients, and eight CT studies evaluated 684 patients. Overall, their quality was moderate. We did not identify meaningful sources of heterogeneity in the study results. Summary sensitivity estimates were 92% (95% CI: 80%-97%) for US versus 94% (95%CI: 87%-97%) for CT (p = 0.65). Summary specificity estimates were 90% (95%CI: 82%-95%) for US versus 99% (95%CI: 90%-100%) for CT (p = 0.07). For the identification of alternative diseases sensitivity ranged between 33% and 78% for US and between 50% and 100% for CT. The currently best available evidence shows no statistically significant difference in accuracy of US and CT in diagnosing ACD. Therefore, both US and CT can be used as initial diagnostic tool until new evidence is brought forward. However, CT is more likely to identify alternative diseases. The Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development, Health Care Efficiency Research programme, funded the study (ZonMw, grant number 945-04-308).     

Diagnostic value of ultrasonography in patients with palpable mammographically noncalcified breast tumors

PURPOSE: To analyze the diagnostic accuracy of mammography, ultrasonography (US), and both methods combined in evaluation of palpable noncalcified breast tumors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mammograms and sonograms of 200 patients with palpable noncalcified breast masses were retrospectively analyzed independently by four experienced radiologists in 3 sessions: Mammography or US interpretations in the first two and combined reading in the last session. Nonneoplastic abnormalities and mammographically obvious cancers were excluded. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed for 115 (60 benign and 55 malignant) tumors and subgroups according to tissue density and tumor size. A single ROC curve for each diagnostic test was obtained by pooling the individual ratings. The area under the ROC curve was used as a measure of diagnostic performance. RESULTS: US revealed significantly higher diagnostic performance than mammography for tumors larger than 2 cm. Combined reading showed significantly higher performance than mammography except for tumors smaller than 2 cm. The performance of all three tests was reduced in dense parenchyma, and significantly so for mammographic and combined interpretation. CONCLUSION: The accuracy of US in patients with palpable mammographically noncalcified and not obviously malignant breast tumors is lower than reported for mixed sample populations. The accuracy of US may be influenced by breast parenchyma density. Combined reading offers the highest diagnostic accuracy.