Cargando…

Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are common imaging methods to detect cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer. We aimed to assess the diagnostic efficacy of CT and MRI in detecting cervical lymph node metastasis, and to establish unified diagnostic criteri...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sun, J, Li, B, Li, CJ, Li, Y, Su, F, Gao, QH, Wu, FL, Yu, T, Wu, L, Li, LJ
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4467645/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26089682
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S73924
_version_ 1782376393941712896
author Sun, J
Li, B
Li, CJ
Li, Y
Su, F
Gao, QH
Wu, FL
Yu, T
Wu, L
Li, LJ
author_facet Sun, J
Li, B
Li, CJ
Li, Y
Su, F
Gao, QH
Wu, FL
Yu, T
Wu, L
Li, LJ
author_sort Sun, J
collection PubMed
description Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are common imaging methods to detect cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer. We aimed to assess the diagnostic efficacy of CT and MRI in detecting cervical lymph node metastasis, and to establish unified diagnostic criteria via systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature search in five databases until January 2014 was carried out. All retrieved studies were reviewed and eligible studies were qualitatively summarized. Besides pooling the sensitivity (SEN) and specificity (SPE) data of CT and MRI, summary receiver operating characteristic curves were generated. A total of 63 studies including 3,029 participants were involved. The pooled results of meta-analysis showed that CT had a higher SEN (0.77 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.73–0.87]) than MRI (0.72 [95% CI 0.70–0.74]) when node was considered as unit of analysis (P<0.05); MRI had a higher SPE (0.81 [95% CI 0.80–0.82]) than CT (0.72 [95% CI 0.69–0.74]) when neck level was considered as unit of analysis (P<0.05) and MRI had a higher area under concentration-time curve than CT when the patient was considered as unit of analysis (P<0.05). With regards to diagnostic criteria, for MRI, the results showed that the minimal axial diameter of 10 mm could be considered as the best size criterion, compared to 12 mm for CT. Overall, MRI conferred significantly higher SPE while CT demonstrated higher SEN. The diagnostic criteria for MRI and CT on size of metastatic lymph nodes were suggested as 10 and 12 mm, respectively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4467645
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44676452015-06-18 Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Sun, J Li, B Li, CJ Li, Y Su, F Gao, QH Wu, FL Yu, T Wu, L Li, LJ Onco Targets Ther Review Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are common imaging methods to detect cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer. We aimed to assess the diagnostic efficacy of CT and MRI in detecting cervical lymph node metastasis, and to establish unified diagnostic criteria via systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature search in five databases until January 2014 was carried out. All retrieved studies were reviewed and eligible studies were qualitatively summarized. Besides pooling the sensitivity (SEN) and specificity (SPE) data of CT and MRI, summary receiver operating characteristic curves were generated. A total of 63 studies including 3,029 participants were involved. The pooled results of meta-analysis showed that CT had a higher SEN (0.77 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.73–0.87]) than MRI (0.72 [95% CI 0.70–0.74]) when node was considered as unit of analysis (P<0.05); MRI had a higher SPE (0.81 [95% CI 0.80–0.82]) than CT (0.72 [95% CI 0.69–0.74]) when neck level was considered as unit of analysis (P<0.05) and MRI had a higher area under concentration-time curve than CT when the patient was considered as unit of analysis (P<0.05). With regards to diagnostic criteria, for MRI, the results showed that the minimal axial diameter of 10 mm could be considered as the best size criterion, compared to 12 mm for CT. Overall, MRI conferred significantly higher SPE while CT demonstrated higher SEN. The diagnostic criteria for MRI and CT on size of metastatic lymph nodes were suggested as 10 and 12 mm, respectively. Dove Medical Press 2015-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4467645/ /pubmed/26089682 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S73924 Text en © 2015 Sun et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Sun, J
Li, B
Li, CJ
Li, Y
Su, F
Gao, QH
Wu, FL
Yu, T
Wu, L
Li, LJ
Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4467645/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26089682
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S73924
work_keys_str_mv AT sunj computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lib computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT licj computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liy computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT suf computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gaoqh computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wufl computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yut computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wul computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lilj computedtomographyversusmagneticresonanceimagingfordiagnosingcervicallymphnodemetastasisofheadandneckcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis