Cargando…

Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Treatment response assessment in high-grade gliomas uses contrast enhanced T1-weighted MRI, but is unreliable. Novel advanced MRI techniques have been studied, but the accuracy is not well known. Therefore, we performed a systematic meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of anato...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Dijken, Bart R. J., van Laar, Peter Jan, Holtman, Gea A., van der Hoorn, Anouk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5579204/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28332014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4789-9
_version_ 1783260664156913664
author van Dijken, Bart R. J.
van Laar, Peter Jan
Holtman, Gea A.
van der Hoorn, Anouk
author_facet van Dijken, Bart R. J.
van Laar, Peter Jan
Holtman, Gea A.
van der Hoorn, Anouk
author_sort van Dijken, Bart R. J.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Treatment response assessment in high-grade gliomas uses contrast enhanced T1-weighted MRI, but is unreliable. Novel advanced MRI techniques have been studied, but the accuracy is not well known. Therefore, we performed a systematic meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of anatomical and advanced MRI for treatment response in high-grade gliomas. METHODS: Databases were searched systematically. Study selection and data extraction were done by two authors independently. Meta-analysis was performed using a bivariate random effects model when ≥5 studies were included. RESULTS: Anatomical MRI (five studies, 166 patients) showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 68% (95%CI 51–81) and 77% (45–93), respectively. Pooled apparent diffusion coefficients (seven studies, 204 patients) demonstrated a sensitivity of 71% (60–80) and specificity of 87% (77–93). DSC-perfusion (18 studies, 708 patients) sensitivity was 87% (82–91) with a specificity of 86% (77–91). DCE-perfusion (five studies, 207 patients) sensitivity was 92% (73–98) and specificity was 85% (76–92). The sensitivity of spectroscopy (nine studies, 203 patients) was 91% (79–97) and specificity was 95% (65–99). CONCLUSION: Advanced techniques showed higher diagnostic accuracy than anatomical MRI, the highest for spectroscopy, supporting the use in treatment response assessment in high-grade gliomas. KEY POINTS: • Treatment response assessment in high-grade gliomas with anatomical MRI is unreliable • Novel advanced MRI techniques have been studied, but diagnostic accuracy is unknown • Meta-analysis demonstrates that advanced MRI showed higher diagnostic accuracy than anatomical MRI • Highest diagnostic accuracy for spectroscopy and perfusion MRI • Supports the incorporation of advanced MRI in high-grade glioma treatment response assessment ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4789-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5579204
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55792042017-09-18 Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis van Dijken, Bart R. J. van Laar, Peter Jan Holtman, Gea A. van der Hoorn, Anouk Eur Radiol Magnetic Resonance OBJECTIVE: Treatment response assessment in high-grade gliomas uses contrast enhanced T1-weighted MRI, but is unreliable. Novel advanced MRI techniques have been studied, but the accuracy is not well known. Therefore, we performed a systematic meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of anatomical and advanced MRI for treatment response in high-grade gliomas. METHODS: Databases were searched systematically. Study selection and data extraction were done by two authors independently. Meta-analysis was performed using a bivariate random effects model when ≥5 studies were included. RESULTS: Anatomical MRI (five studies, 166 patients) showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 68% (95%CI 51–81) and 77% (45–93), respectively. Pooled apparent diffusion coefficients (seven studies, 204 patients) demonstrated a sensitivity of 71% (60–80) and specificity of 87% (77–93). DSC-perfusion (18 studies, 708 patients) sensitivity was 87% (82–91) with a specificity of 86% (77–91). DCE-perfusion (five studies, 207 patients) sensitivity was 92% (73–98) and specificity was 85% (76–92). The sensitivity of spectroscopy (nine studies, 203 patients) was 91% (79–97) and specificity was 95% (65–99). CONCLUSION: Advanced techniques showed higher diagnostic accuracy than anatomical MRI, the highest for spectroscopy, supporting the use in treatment response assessment in high-grade gliomas. KEY POINTS: • Treatment response assessment in high-grade gliomas with anatomical MRI is unreliable • Novel advanced MRI techniques have been studied, but diagnostic accuracy is unknown • Meta-analysis demonstrates that advanced MRI showed higher diagnostic accuracy than anatomical MRI • Highest diagnostic accuracy for spectroscopy and perfusion MRI • Supports the incorporation of advanced MRI in high-grade glioma treatment response assessment ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4789-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-03-22 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5579204/ /pubmed/28332014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4789-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Magnetic Resonance
van Dijken, Bart R. J.
van Laar, Peter Jan
Holtman, Gea A.
van der Hoorn, Anouk
Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging techniques for treatment response evaluation in patients with high-grade glioma, a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Magnetic Resonance
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5579204/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28332014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4789-9
work_keys_str_mv AT vandijkenbartrj diagnosticaccuracyofmagneticresonanceimagingtechniquesfortreatmentresponseevaluationinpatientswithhighgradegliomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanlaarpeterjan diagnosticaccuracyofmagneticresonanceimagingtechniquesfortreatmentresponseevaluationinpatientswithhighgradegliomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT holtmangeaa diagnosticaccuracyofmagneticresonanceimagingtechniquesfortreatmentresponseevaluationinpatientswithhighgradegliomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanderhoornanouk diagnosticaccuracyofmagneticresonanceimagingtechniquesfortreatmentresponseevaluationinpatientswithhighgradegliomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis