Cargando…

Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy

Background: Because the incidence of endometrial cancer has been increasing every year, it is important to identify an effective screening method for it. The endometrial cytology test (ECT) is considered to be the more acceptable technique compared to invasive endometrial sampling. Methods: The stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Ting, Jiang, Ruoan, Yao, Yingsha, Wang, Yaping, Liu, Wu, Qian, Linhua, Li, Juanqing, Weimer, Joerg, Huang, Xiufeng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10054381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36983358
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062358
_version_ 1785015656764145664
author Wang, Ting
Jiang, Ruoan
Yao, Yingsha
Wang, Yaping
Liu, Wu
Qian, Linhua
Li, Juanqing
Weimer, Joerg
Huang, Xiufeng
author_facet Wang, Ting
Jiang, Ruoan
Yao, Yingsha
Wang, Yaping
Liu, Wu
Qian, Linhua
Li, Juanqing
Weimer, Joerg
Huang, Xiufeng
author_sort Wang, Ting
collection PubMed
description Background: Because the incidence of endometrial cancer has been increasing every year, it is important to identify an effective screening method for it. The endometrial cytology test (ECT) is considered to be the more acceptable technique compared to invasive endometrial sampling. Methods: The study followed the Priority Reporting Project for Systematic Evaluation and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-DTA) protocol. This systematic rating searched EMBASE and Web of Science databases for studies on ECT for endometrial cancer from the databases’ dates of inception to 30 September 2022. All literature screening and data extraction were performed by two researchers, while the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed against defined inclusion criteria. And a third researcher resolves the disagreements. Results: Twenty-six studies were eventually included in this final analysis. Meta-analysis results showed that the diagnostic accuracy characteristics of ECT for endometrial cancer were as follows: combined sensitivity = 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) (0.83–0.86)], combined specificity = 0.98 [95% CI (0.98–0.98)], combined positive likelihood ratio = 34.65 [95% CI (20.90–57.45)], combined negative likelihood ratio = 0.21 [95% CI (0.15–0.30)], and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.9673. Conclusions: ECT had the ability to detect endometrial cancer with strong specificity, although some studies have demonstrated significant differences in sensitivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10054381
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100543812023-03-30 Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy Wang, Ting Jiang, Ruoan Yao, Yingsha Wang, Yaping Liu, Wu Qian, Linhua Li, Juanqing Weimer, Joerg Huang, Xiufeng J Clin Med Systematic Review Background: Because the incidence of endometrial cancer has been increasing every year, it is important to identify an effective screening method for it. The endometrial cytology test (ECT) is considered to be the more acceptable technique compared to invasive endometrial sampling. Methods: The study followed the Priority Reporting Project for Systematic Evaluation and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-DTA) protocol. This systematic rating searched EMBASE and Web of Science databases for studies on ECT for endometrial cancer from the databases’ dates of inception to 30 September 2022. All literature screening and data extraction were performed by two researchers, while the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed against defined inclusion criteria. And a third researcher resolves the disagreements. Results: Twenty-six studies were eventually included in this final analysis. Meta-analysis results showed that the diagnostic accuracy characteristics of ECT for endometrial cancer were as follows: combined sensitivity = 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI) (0.83–0.86)], combined specificity = 0.98 [95% CI (0.98–0.98)], combined positive likelihood ratio = 34.65 [95% CI (20.90–57.45)], combined negative likelihood ratio = 0.21 [95% CI (0.15–0.30)], and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.9673. Conclusions: ECT had the ability to detect endometrial cancer with strong specificity, although some studies have demonstrated significant differences in sensitivity. MDPI 2023-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10054381/ /pubmed/36983358 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062358 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Wang, Ting
Jiang, Ruoan
Yao, Yingsha
Wang, Yaping
Liu, Wu
Qian, Linhua
Li, Juanqing
Weimer, Joerg
Huang, Xiufeng
Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy
title Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy
title_full Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy
title_fullStr Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy
title_full_unstemmed Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy
title_short Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy
title_sort endometrial cytology in diagnosis of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10054381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36983358
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062358
work_keys_str_mv AT wangting endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT jiangruoan endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT yaoyingsha endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT wangyaping endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT liuwu endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT qianlinhua endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT lijuanqing endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT weimerjoerg endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT huangxiufeng endometrialcytologyindiagnosisofendometrialcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy