Diagnostic value of EUS elastography in differentiation of benign and malignant solid pancreatic masses: A meta-analysis

Background/AimsEUS elastography is a novel technique that can be used for distinguishing benign from malignant lymph nodes and focal pancreatic masses. However, the studies pertaining to EUS elastography for differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses have reported widely varied sensitivities and specificities. A meta-analysis of all relevant articles was performed to estimate the overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS elastography for differentiating benign and malignant solid pancreatic masses.MethodsThe literatures were identified by searching in PubMed and Embase databases. Two reviewers independently extracted the information from the literatures for constructing 2 × 2 table. A random-effect model or a fixed-effect model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) also was constructed. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were used to explore the sources of heterogeneity.Results13 studies including a total of 1042 patients with solid pancreatic masses were selected for meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS elastography for differentiating benign and malignant solid pancreatic masses were 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%–96%), 69% (95% CI, 63%–75%), respectively. The area under SROC (AUC) was 0.8695. Two significant variables were associated with heterogeneity: color pattern and blinding.ConclusionAs a less invasive modality, EUS elastography is a promising method for differentiating benign and malignant solid pancreatic masses with a high sensitivity, and it can prove to be a valuable supplement to EUS-FNA.     

Endoscopic ultrasound elastography in the diagnosis of pancreatic masses: A meta-analysis

Background and aims

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) elastography is a novel non-invasive technique that can be used for distinguishing benign from malignant pancreatic masses. However, the studies have reported widely varied sensitivities and specificities. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the performance of EUS elastography for the differentiation of benign and malignant pancreatic masses.

Diagnostic accuracy of EUS and CT of vascular invasion in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review

Objective

The objective of this study was to summarize the accuracy of preoperative vascular invasion with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography (CT) test performance in pancreatic cancer with meta-analysis

Method

Two reviewers searched MEDLINE database to identify relevant studies. The reference lists of the trials were manually searched. Included studies used surgical and/or histological findings as the “gold standard,” and provided sufficient data to construct a diagnostic 2 × 2 table. A statistical program of Meta-Disc was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, DOR, and the SROC curve. Publication bias was assessed by Deeks’ asymmetry test. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were calculated to down the heterogeneity. Meta-regression was calculated to evaluate potential sources of heterogeneity

Result

A total of 30 studies with 1,554 patients were included for the analysis, nine of these studies compared EUS with CT to assess the diagnostic efficiency The pooled sensitivity of EUS and CT was 72 % (95 % CI 67–77 %) and 63 % (95 % CI 58–67 %), and the pooled specificity of EUS and CT was 89 % (95 % CI 86–92 %) and 92 % (95 % CI 90–94 %), respectively. The positive LR of EUS and CT was 5.14 (95 % CI 3.14–8.40) and 6.21 (95 % CI 3.96–9.71), and the negative LR was 0.36 (95 % CI 0.25–0.52) and 0.41 (95 % CI 0.31–0.55), respectively. The AUCs of EUS and CT were 0.9037 and 0.8948. The subgroup analysis of nine studies performed both EUS and CT showed CT scan with a lower sensitivity of 48 % (95 % CI 0.40–0.56), when compared to EUS of 69 % (95 % CI 0.61–0.77). The overall AUCs of CT scan appear to be lower (AUCs = 0.8589), compared with EUS (AUCs = 0.9379)

Conclusion

EUS performed better than CT in differentiating vascular invasion preoperative on pancreatic cancer. EUS could provide other additional information when compared with CT.     

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A systematic review and meta analysis

AIM: To detect pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) has been varied. This study is undertaken to evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in detecting PNETs.METHODS: Only EUS studies confirmed by surgery or appropriate follow-up were selected. Articles were searched in Medline, Ovid journals, Medline nonindexed citations, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews. Pooling was conducted by both fixed and random effects model). RESULTS: Initial search identified 2610 reference articles, of these 140 relevant articles were selected and reviewed. Data was extracted from 13 studies (n = 456) which met the inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity of EUS in detecting a PNETs was 87.2% (95%CI: 82.2-91.2). EUS had a pooled specificity of 98.0% (95%CI: 94.3-99.6). The positive likelihood ratio of EUS was 11.1 (95%CI: 5.34-22.8) and negative likelihood ratio was 0.17 (95%CI: 0.13-0.24). The diagnostic odds ratio, the odds of having anatomic PNETs in positive as compared to negative EUS studies was 94.7 (95%CI: 37.9-236.1). Begg-Mazumdar bias indicator for publication bias gave a Kendall’s tau value of 0.31 (P = 0.16), indication no publication bias. The P for χ2 heterogeneity for all the pooled accuracy estimates was > 0.10. CONCLUSION: EUS has excellent sensitivity and specificity to detect PNETs. EUS should be strongly considered for evaluation of PNETs.     

小探头超声内镜诊断早期胃癌浸润深度准确性的Meta分析

目的对小探头超声内镜诊断早期胃癌浸润深度的准确性进行定量系统评价。 方法检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase、CNKI、万方、维普数据库检索相关文献。对纳入的文献用Stata 14.2软件进行meta分析,得出汇总敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断优势比及其95% CI,绘制总受试者工作特征曲线(SROC),并计算曲线下面积(AUC)等,评估其诊断价值。 结果共纳入文献16篇,包括3 168例病灶,汇总敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断优势比及其95% CI分别是0.85(95% CI：0.78～0.90),0.73(95% CI：0.65～0.80),3.2(95% CI：2.4～4.1),0.20(95% CI：0.14～0.30),16(95% CI：9～26),SROC曲线下面积为0.85。 结论小探头超声内镜虽不能准确诊断早期胃癌M/SM1层浸润,但仍能很大程度提高对早期胃癌浸润深度的正确判断。     

MRI features for differentiation of autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and AimsThe accurate differential diagnosis between autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is clinically important. We aimed to determine significant MRI features for differentiating AIP from PDAC, including assessment of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI).MethodsWe performed a systematic search using three databases. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was calculated using a bivariate random effects model to determine significant MRI features for differentiating AIP from PDAC. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated. The qualitative systematic review for DWI assessment was performed.ResultsOf nine studies (775 patients), multiple main pancreatic duct (MPD) strictures, absence of upstream marked MPD dilatation, peripancreatic rim, and duct penetration sign were significant MRI features for differentiating AIP from PDAC. Absence of MPD dilatation had the highest pooled sensitivity (87%, 95% CI=68–96%), whereas peripancreatic rim had the highest pooled specificity (100%, 95% CI=88–100%). Of 12 studies evaluating DWI, seven reported statistically significant differences in apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values between AIP and PDAC; however, four reported lower ADC values in AIP than in PDAC, but three reported the opposite result.ConclusionThe four significant MRI features can be useful to differentiate AIP from PDAC, but DWI assessment might be limited.     

Lesion discrimination with breath-hold hepatic diffusionweighted imaging:A meta-analysis

AIM:To investigate the diagnostic capability of breathhold diffusion-weighted imaging(DWI) for differentiation between malignant and benign hepatic lesions.METHODS:A total of 614 malignant liver lesions(132 hepatocellular carcinomas,468 metastases and 14 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas) and 291 benign liver lesions(102 hemangiomas,158 cysts,24 focal nodular hyperplasia,1 angiomyolipoma and 6 hepatic adenomas) were included from seven studies(eight sets of data).RESULTS:The pooled sensitivity and specificity of breath-hold DWI were 0.93 [95% confidence interval(CI):0.91-0.95] and 0.87(95%CI:0.83-0.91),respectively.The positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were 7.28(95%CI:4.51-11.76) and 0.09(95%CI:0.05-0.17),respectively.The P value for χ2 heterogeneity for all pooled estimates was 0.05.From the fitted summary receiver operating characteristic curve,the area under the curve and Q * index were 0.96 and 0.91,respectively.Publication bias was not present(t = 0.49,P = 0.64).The meta-regression analysis indicated that evaluated covariates including magnetic resonance imaging modality,echo time,mean age,maximum b factor,and number of b factors were not sources of heterogeneity(all P 0.05).CONCLUSION:Breath-hold DWI is useful for differentiating between malignant and benign hepatic lesions.The diffusion characteristics of benign lesions that mimic malignant ones have rarely been investigated.     

Shear-wave versus strain elastography in endoscopic ultrasound for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis

Background/Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) elastography is a non-invasive diagnostic method for evaluating tissue elasticity. The aims of this study were to compare shear-wave elastography (SWE) and conventional strain elastography (SE) in determination of the diagnosis and degree of chronic pancreatitis (CP).MethodsForty-nine patients who underwent computed tomography (CT), EUS-SWE, EUS-SE, and pancreatic exocrine function testing between January 2019 and January 2022 were prospectively evaluated. CP was diagnosed according to Japan Pancreatic Society criteria (JPSC) 2019, Rosemont criteria (RC), CT findings, and pancreatic exocrine dysfunction. The cut-off values, sensitivity, and specificity for CP diagnosed according to the four criteria were calculated for EUS-SWE and EUS-SE. Relationships between values measured by either of the EUS elastography methods and the number of EUS features were also assessed.ResultsEUS-SWE values were positively correlated with the severity grades of RC and JPSC, but EUS-SE values were not. EUS-SWE was significantly better than EUS-SE for diagnosing CP defined according to CT findings (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUROC]: 0.77 vs. 0.61, P < 0.001), RC (AUROC: 0.85 vs. 0.56, P < 0.001), JPSC 2019 (AUROC: 0.83 vs. 0.53, P < 0.001), and exocrine dysfunction (AUROC: 0.78 vs. 0.61, P < 0.001). EUS-SWE values were positively correlated with the number of EUS features, but EUS-SE values were not.ConclusionsEUS-SWE provides objective assessment for diagnosing and assessing the degree of CP defined according to the criteria of CT findings, RC, JPSC, or exocrine dysfunction, and it can be considered a non-invasive diagnostic tool for CP and exocrine dysfunction.     

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided elastography in the nodal staging of oesophageal cancer

AIM: To assess quantitative endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided elastography in the nodal staging of oesophago-gastric cancers.METHODS: This was a single tertiary centre study assessing 50 patients with established oesophago-gastric cancer undergoing EUS-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) of lymph nodes between July 2007 and July 2009. EUS-guided elastography of lymph nodes was performed before EUS-FNAB. Standard EUS characteristics were also described. Cytological determination of whether a lymph node was malignant or benign was used as the gold standard for this study. Comparisons of elastography and standard EUS characteristics were made between the cytologically benign and malignant nodes. The main outcome measure was the accuracy of elastography in differentiating between benign and malignant lymph nodes in oesophageal cancers.RESULTS: EUS elastography and FNAB were performed on 53 lymph nodes. Cytological malignancy was found in 23 nodes, one was indeterminate, one was found to be a gastrointestinal stromal tumor and 25 of the nodes were negative for malignancy. On 3 occasions insufficient material was obtained for analysis. The area under the curve for the receiver operating characteristic curve for elastography strain ratio was 0.87 (P < 0.0001). Elastography strain ratio had a sensitivity 83%, specificity 96%, positive predictive value 95%, and negative predictive value 86% for distinguishing between malignant and benign nodes. The overall accuracy of elastography strain ratio was 90%. Elastography was more sensitive and specific in determining malignant nodal disease than standard EUS criteria.CONCLUSION: EUS elastography is a promising modality that may complement standard EUS and help guide EUS-FNAB during staging of upper gastrointestinal tract cancer.     

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesion: a systematic review

Objective

To summarize EUS-FNA test performance in suspected pancreatic malignancy with meta-analysis.

Method

Two reviewers searched MEDLINE (PubMed and Ovid from January 2002 to January 2012) database to identify relevant studies. The reference lists of the trials were manually searched. Included studies used histopathology or clinical and morphological (CT and MRI and US) follow-up as the “gold standard” and provided sufficient data to construct a diagnostic 2?×?2 table. A statistical program of Meta-Disc was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, DOR, and the SROC curve. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were calculated to evaluate potential sources of heterogeneity.

Result

A total of 15 studies with 1860 patients were included for the analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS-FNA were 92?% (95?% CI?=?91–93?%, p?I ²?=?69.6?%) and 96?% (95?% CI?=?93–98?%, p?=?0.006, I ²?=?54.9?%), respectively. The positive LR and negative LR were 14.24 (95?% CI?=?7.78–26.07) and 0.09 (95?% CI?=?0.07–0.13), respectively. The area under the curve was 0.974. The subgroup analysis of six studies with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) showed a pooled sensitivity of 95 % (95?% CI?=?93–96?%), with p value equal 0.622 and I ²?=?0. The sensitivity analysis of ten high-quality studies (a score of ≥4) showed a pooled sensitivity of 94?% (95?% CI?=?93–96?%, p?=?0.144, I ²?=?33.1?%), and the pooled specificity was 0.95 (95?% CI, 0.91–0.97).

Conclusion

EUS-FNA had overall excellent specificity and sensitivity in accurately diagnosing solid pancreatic masses. ROSE could help to improve the accuracy of diagnostic test.     

Applications of endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic cancer

Since the introduction of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA),EUS has assumed a growing role in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma(PDAC).The objective of this review is to discuss the various applications of EUS and EUS-FNA in PDAC.Initially,its use for detection,diagnosis and staging will be described.EUS and EUS-FNA are highly accurate modalities for detection and diagnosis of PDAC,this high accuracy,however,is decreased in specific situations particularly in the presence of chronic pancreatitis.Novel techniques such as contrast-enhanced EUS,elastography and analysis of DNA markers such as k-ras mutation analysis in FNA samples are in progress and might improve the accuracy of EUS in the detection of PDAC in this setting and will be addressed.EUS and EUS-FNA have recently evolved from a diagnostic to a therapeutic technique in the management of PDAC.Significant developments in therapeutic EUS have occurred including advances in celiac plexus interventions with direct injection of ganglia and improved pain control,EUS-guided fiducial and brachytherapy seed placement,fine-needle injection of intra-tumoral agents and advances in EUS-guided biliary drainage.The future role of EUS and EUS in management of PDAC is still emerging.     

Assessment for diagnosis of lymph node metastasis in esophageal cancer using endoscopic ultrasound elastography

Background

We performed endoscopic ultrasound real-time tissue elastography to more accurately diagnose lymph node metastasis of esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of EUS elastography to distinguish benign from malignant lymph nodes in esophageal cancer patients.

Methods

The present study had two steps. As the first step (study 1), we developed diagnostic criteria for metastatic lymph nodes using elastography and verified the validity of the criteria. Three hundred and twenty-two lymph nodes from 35 patients treated by surgical resection were included in the study. As the second step (study 2), we preoperatively examined the lymph nodes of esophageal cancer patients with EUS elastography and compared its diagnostic performance with that of the conventional B-mode EUS images. A total of 115 lymph nodes from 31 patients were included.

Results

In study 1, lymph nodes were considered malignant if 50 % or more of the node appeared blue, or if the peripheral part of the lesion was blue and the central part was red/yellow/green. The sensitivity and specificity of the elastography were 79.7 and 97.6 % with an accuracy of 93.8 %, which was significantly higher than the values for conventional B-mode imaging. In study 2, the sensitivity and specificity of the EUS elastography were 91.2 and 94.5 % with an accuracy of 93.9 %, which was also significantly higher than the values for conventional B-mode EUS imaging.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrated that EUS elastography is useful for diagnosing lymph node metastasis of esophageal cancer.

     

Staging accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound for esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a meta‐analysis and systematic review

This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the staging of esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Articles were searched in Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews, Google scholar, and EMBASE. Two reviewers independently searched and extracted data. Meta‐analysis of the accuracy of EUS was analyzed by calculating pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Pooling was conducted using either fixed‐effects model or random‐effects model depending on the heterogeneity across studies. Sixteen studies (n = 724) were included in this analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS to diagnose T1 stage tumor was 23% (95% confidence interval [CI] 16–32%) and 95% (95%CI 93–97%), respectively. For T2 stage, EUS had a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 29% (95%CI 19–41%) and 84% (95%CI 77–88%). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS were 81% (95%CI 72–88%) and 42% (95%CI 33–52%) in determining T3 stage tumor. To diagnose T4 stage tumor, EUS had a pooled sensitivity of 43% (95%CI 31–56%) and specificity of 96% (95%CI 94–97%), respectively. In determining N stage, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS were 69% (95%CI 58–79%) and 52% (95%CI 42–62%). EUS is a moderately accurate technique in staging esophageal cancer after NAC. Its sensitivity is relatively high in T3 while specificity is high in other T stages (T1, T2, and T4). Tumors restaged by EUS as T4 should not be assigned to surgery because it is very likely to be inoperable. EUS is not reliable for N staging with its poor sensitivity and specificity. Subgroup analysis shows that staging accuracy did not improve with time.     

Endoscopic Ultrasound Elastography for Differential Diagnosis of Pancreatic Masses: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Distinguishing malignant from benign pancreatic tumors is challenging with current imaging techniques. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) elastography has further improved the efficacy of EUS for characterizing pancreatic lesions.

Aims

To assess, by combining data from existing trials, the accuracy of EUS elastography in diagnosing malignant tumors for patients with pancreatic masses.

Methods

All relevant studies published were identified by systematic searching of databases. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to combine study results.

Results

Seven studies involving 752 patients were included. The sensitivity of EUS elastography for differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses was 97 % (95 % CI, 0.95–0.98), and the specificity was 76 % (95 % CI, 0.69–0.82). The area under the curve under summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) was 0.9529. The combined positive likelihood ratio was 3.71 (95 % CI, 2.72–5.07), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.05 (95 % CI, 0.02–0.13).

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis shows that EUS elastography is a useful tool for differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms with very high sensitivity and relatively low specificity. The results indicate that EUS elastography not only provides information complementary to that from EUS but also potentially increases the yield of fine needle aspiration and reduces the number of unnecessary biopsies.     

Exosomal glypican-1 discriminates pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from chronic pancreatitis

Background and aimsPancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) diagnosis can be difficult in a chronic pancreatitis (CP) background, especially in its mass forming presentation. We aimed to assess the accuracy of glypican-1-positive circulating exosomes (GPC1⁺crExos) to distinguish PDAC from CP versus the state-of-the-art CA 19–9 biomarker.MethodsThis was a unicentric prospective cohort. Endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration or biopsy and blood tests (GPC1⁺crExos and serum CA 19–9) were performed.ResultsThe cohort comprised 60 PDAC and 29 CP (7 of which mass forming - MF) patients. Median levels of GPC1⁺crExos were significantly higher in PDAC (99.7%) versus CP (28.4%; p<0.0001) with an AUROC of 0.96 with 98.3% sensitivity and 86.2% specificity for a cut-off of 45.0% (p<0.0001); this outperforms CA 19–9 AUROC of 0.82 with 78.3% sensitivity and 65.5% specificity at a cut-off of 37 U/mL (p<0.0001). The superiority of% GPC1+crExos over CA 19–99 in differentiating PDAC from CP was observed in both early (stage I) and advanced tumors (stages II-IV).ConclusionLevels of GPC1⁺crExos coupled to beads enable differential diagnosis between PDAC and CP including its mass-forming presentation.     

The accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography in differentiating mucosal from deeper gastric cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM:  With the advent of endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection techniques, pretreatment differentiation between mucosal and deeper gastric cancer has become increasingly important. The aim of this study was to systematically review published data on the diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in differentiating between mucosal and deeper gastric cancer.
METHODS:  A systematic search for relevant studies was performed of the PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of each study. Sensitivity and specificity of EUS were calculated for each study and a summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) was constructed. Subgroup analyses were performed if results of individual studies were heterogeneous.
RESULTS:  The inclusion criteria were met by 18 studies. The studies had poor methodological quality. Sensitivity and specificity of EUS in detecting cancerous extension beyond the mucosa ranged from 18.2 to 100% (median 87.8%) and from 34.7 to 100% (median 80.2%), with an area under the sROC of 0.8924. There was significant heterogeneity in both sensitivities and specificities among the included studies ( P < 0.0001). Studies which only included patients endoscopically suspected of having EGC and studies which only used transducer frequencies ≥15 MHz were homogeneous in sensitivities ( P = 0.1828 and 0.4501, respectively).
CONCLUSION:  It is unclear yet whether EUS can accurately differentiate between mucosal and deeper gastric cancer. Factors that may influence its diagnostic performance should be further explored.     

Diagnostic Value of Ankle-Brachial Index in Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Meta-analysis

Background

In a previous review, we reported that ankle brachial index (ABI) ≤ 0.90 could reliably identify patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Since then, more studies have been published which may extend the power of a meta-analysis of studies of diagnostic accuracy of the ABI. MEDLINE and several other databases were searched for studies on sensitivity and specificity of using ABI ≤ 0.90 for PAD diagnosis compared with angiography.

Methods

Quality of each study was assessed by standards for reporting diagnostic accuracy initiative and quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy tool. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q statistic, χ², and inconsistency index. The area under the curve and Q* were estimated using summary receiver operator curve. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of ABI ≤ 0.90 to diagnose PAD were estimated using Meta-DiSc software (Meta-DiSc, Madrid, Spain).

Results

Four studies comprising 569 patients (922 limbs) met inclusion criteria. Significant heterogeneity among these studies was not detected in DOR but was evident in pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, and NLR. The area under the curve under the summary receiver operator curve is 0.87 (standard error = 0.02) and diagnostic accuracy (Q*) is 0.80 (standard error = 0.02). Additionally, DOR was 15.33 with corresponding 95% confidence intervals of 9.39-25.02. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ABI ≤ 0.90 for PAD diagnosis were 75% and 86% and the pooled PLR and NLR were 4.18 and 0.29, respectively.

Conclusions

We conclude that test of ABI ≤ 0.90 can be a useful tool to identify PAD with serious stenosis in clinical practice.     

Secretin-stimulated magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for the detection of chronic pancreatitis: A meta-analysis

ObjectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of secretin-stimulated magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (S-MRI/MRCP) as noninvasive modalities in detecting chronic pancreatitis (CP).MethodsA systematic literature search in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Databases to identify relevant original studies. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (version 2). Study data were independently extracted to calculate sensitivity and specificity, as well as areas under summary receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs), and to test for heterogeneity and the threshold effect.ResultsThe sample comprised 11 studies including 180 patients with CP and 340 patients without CP. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65–0.78) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.83–0.90), respectively. Pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were 4.99 (95% CI 2.59–9.61) and 0.32 (95% CI 0.19–0.54), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was 23.31 (95% CI 7.50–72.44). The AUC and Q¹ index were 0.8631 and 0.7937, respectively. Publication bias was absent (P = 0.64).ConclusionsS-MRI/MRCP had low sensitivity and moderately high specificity for the detection of CP. Large-scale, quality-controlled, prospective studies are needed to verify the diagnostic accuracy of these modalities.     

Differential diagnosis between malignant and benign breast lesions using single-voxel proton MRS: a meta-analysis

Objectives

We aim to investigate the diagnostic capability of single-voxel proton MR spectroscopy (MRS) for benign/malignant discrimination of focal breast lesions with a meta-analysis.

Materials and methods

The meta-analysis included a total of 750 malignant breast lesions and 419 benign breast lesions from eighteen studies.

Results

The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MRS were 0.71 (95 % CI 0.68–0.74) and 0.85 (95 % CI 0.81–0.88), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio and negative LR were 4.11 (95 % CI 3.11–5.43) and 0.25 (95 % CI 0.17–0.36), respectively. The P value for χ ² heterogeneity for all pooled estimates was <0.05. From the fitted summary receiver operating characteristics curve, AUC was 0.89 and Q* was 0.84. Asymmetrical in funnel plots indicated there may be publication bias (t = 2.85, P = 0.012). The meta-regression analysis indicated that neither threshold effect nor evaluated covariates that include strength of field, scanning technique (PRESS or STEAM), repetition time, NSA, and pre- or post-contrast agent were the sources of heterogeneity (all P value >0.05).

Conclusions

Single-voxel proton MRS was useful for differentiation between malignant and benign breast lesions. However, pooled diagnostic measures might be overestimated. The standardization of the acquisition protocol for MRS across the multicenter trials is recommended.     

Association between Ras association domain family 1A promoter methylation and hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis

AIM:To assess diagnostic accuracy of Ras association domain family 1A(RASSF1A)promoter methylation in body fluids(serum,plasma and whole blood)for hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC).METHODS:Relative information about study characteristics and incidence of RASSF1A methylation was collected.Quality of all included studies was evaluated by Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using a randomeffect model,and a summary receiver operating characteristic curve was used to demonstrate the overall diagnostic performance.Positive likelihood ratio(PLR),negative likelihood ratio(NLR),and diagnostic odds ratio(DOR)with 95%CI were also calculated.Meta-regression was applied to analyze observed heterogeneity,and Deeks’test was performed to detect publication bias.RESULTS:After a systematic literature review,seven studies with a total of 302 cases of HCC and 250 cases of chronic liver diseases were included in the analysis.The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.70(95%CI:0.49-0.85)and 0.72(95%CI:0.54-0.85),respectively.The PLR was 2.51(95%CI:1.64-3.86),NLR was 0.41(95%CI:0.25-0.68),and DOR was 6.13(95%CI:3.17-11.84).Theχ2values of sensitivity,specificity,PLR,NLR and DOR were 59.41(P<0.001),50.50(P<0.001),17.40(P=0.010),31.24(P<0.001)and80.51(P<0.001),respectively.The area under the curve was 0.77(95%CI:0.73-0.81).Three factors were analyzed by univariate meta-regression and none was significant to interpret the observed heterogeneity(P>0.05).No significant publication bias was detected by Deeks’test(P=0.346).CONCLUSION:We showed the potential diagnostic value of RASSF1A methylation in body fluids in HCC patients and it may improve diagnostic accuracy combined with theα-fetoprotein test.