Cargando…

Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To compare the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 and Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) 2018 criteria for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with hepatobiliary agent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shin, Jaeseung, Lee, Sunyoung, Yoon, Ja Kyung, Son, Won Jeong, Roh, Yun Ho, Chung, Yong Eun, Choi, Jin-Young, Park, Mi-Suk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Editorial Office of Gut and Liver 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10191791/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36317516
http://dx.doi.org/10.5009/gnl220115
_version_ 1785043527372111872
author Shin, Jaeseung
Lee, Sunyoung
Yoon, Ja Kyung
Son, Won Jeong
Roh, Yun Ho
Chung, Yong Eun
Choi, Jin-Young
Park, Mi-Suk
author_facet Shin, Jaeseung
Lee, Sunyoung
Yoon, Ja Kyung
Son, Won Jeong
Roh, Yun Ho
Chung, Yong Eun
Choi, Jin-Young
Park, Mi-Suk
author_sort Shin, Jaeseung
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/AIMS: To compare the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 and Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) 2018 criteria for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with hepatobiliary agent (HBA). METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies from January 1, 2018, to October 20, 2021, that compared the diagnostic performance of two imaging criteria on HBA-MRI. A bivariate random-effects model was fitted to calculate the per-observation sensitivity and specificity, and the estimates of paired data were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the observation size. Meta-regression analysis was also performed for study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Of the six studies included, the pooled sensitivity of the definite HCC category of the KLCA-NCC criteria (82%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74% to 90%; I(2)=84%) was higher than that of LR-5 of LI-RADS v2018 (65%; 95% CI, 52% to 77%; I(2)=96%) for diagnosing HCC (p<0.001), while the specificity was lower for KLCA-NCC criteria (87%; 95% CI, 84% to 91%; I(2)=0%) than LI-RADS v2018 (93%; 95% CI, 91% to 96%; I(2)=0%) (p=0.017). For observations sized ≥20 mm, the sensitivity was higher for KLCA-NCC 2018 than for LI-RADS v2018 (84% vs 74%, p=0.012), with no significant difference in specificity (81% vs 85%, p=0.451). The reference standard was a significant factor contributing to the heterogeneity of sensitivities. CONCLUSIONS: The definite HCC category of KLCA-NCC 2018 provided a higher sensitivity and lower specificity than the LR-5 of LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosing HCC using MRI with HBA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10191791
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Editorial Office of Gut and Liver
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101917912023-05-18 Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies Shin, Jaeseung Lee, Sunyoung Yoon, Ja Kyung Son, Won Jeong Roh, Yun Ho Chung, Yong Eun Choi, Jin-Young Park, Mi-Suk Gut Liver Original Article BACKGROUND/AIMS: To compare the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 and Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) 2018 criteria for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with hepatobiliary agent (HBA). METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies from January 1, 2018, to October 20, 2021, that compared the diagnostic performance of two imaging criteria on HBA-MRI. A bivariate random-effects model was fitted to calculate the per-observation sensitivity and specificity, and the estimates of paired data were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the observation size. Meta-regression analysis was also performed for study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Of the six studies included, the pooled sensitivity of the definite HCC category of the KLCA-NCC criteria (82%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74% to 90%; I(2)=84%) was higher than that of LR-5 of LI-RADS v2018 (65%; 95% CI, 52% to 77%; I(2)=96%) for diagnosing HCC (p<0.001), while the specificity was lower for KLCA-NCC criteria (87%; 95% CI, 84% to 91%; I(2)=0%) than LI-RADS v2018 (93%; 95% CI, 91% to 96%; I(2)=0%) (p=0.017). For observations sized ≥20 mm, the sensitivity was higher for KLCA-NCC 2018 than for LI-RADS v2018 (84% vs 74%, p=0.012), with no significant difference in specificity (81% vs 85%, p=0.451). The reference standard was a significant factor contributing to the heterogeneity of sensitivities. CONCLUSIONS: The definite HCC category of KLCA-NCC 2018 provided a higher sensitivity and lower specificity than the LR-5 of LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosing HCC using MRI with HBA. Editorial Office of Gut and Liver 2023-05-15 2022-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10191791/ /pubmed/36317516 http://dx.doi.org/10.5009/gnl220115 Text en Copyright © Gut and Liver. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Shin, Jaeseung
Lee, Sunyoung
Yoon, Ja Kyung
Son, Won Jeong
Roh, Yun Ho
Chung, Yong Eun
Choi, Jin-Young
Park, Mi-Suk
Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies
title Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies
title_full Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies
title_fullStr Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies
title_short Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS v2018 versus KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Hepatobiliary Agent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies
title_sort diagnostic performance of li-rads v2018 versus klca-ncc 2018 criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma using magnetic resonance imaging with hepatobiliary agent: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10191791/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36317516
http://dx.doi.org/10.5009/gnl220115
work_keys_str_mv AT shinjaeseung diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT leesunyoung diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT yoonjakyung diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT sonwonjeong diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT rohyunho diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT chungyongeun diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT choijinyoung diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT parkmisuk diagnosticperformanceofliradsv2018versusklcancc2018criteriaforhepatocellularcarcinomausingmagneticresonanceimagingwithhepatobiliaryagentasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies