Cargando…

Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background: We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and shear wave elastography (SWE) in differentiating benign and malignant lesions in different body sites. Methods: A computerized literature search of Medline, Embase, SCOPUS,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huang, Rongzhong, Jiang, Lihong, Xu, Yu, Gong, Yuping, Ran, Haitao, Wang, Zhigang, Sun, Yang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6412152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30891425
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00102
_version_ 1783402538962255872
author Huang, Rongzhong
Jiang, Lihong
Xu, Yu
Gong, Yuping
Ran, Haitao
Wang, Zhigang
Sun, Yang
author_facet Huang, Rongzhong
Jiang, Lihong
Xu, Yu
Gong, Yuping
Ran, Haitao
Wang, Zhigang
Sun, Yang
author_sort Huang, Rongzhong
collection PubMed
description Background: We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and shear wave elastography (SWE) in differentiating benign and malignant lesions in different body sites. Methods: A computerized literature search of Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, and Web of Science was performed using relevant keywords. Following data extraction, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for CEUS, and SWE compared to histopathology as a reference standard. Statistical analyses were conducted by MetaDiSc (version 1.4) and R software (version 3.4.3). Results: One hundred and fourteen studies (15,926 patients) were pooled in the final analyses. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had significantly higher DOR than SWE (DOR = 27.14, 95%CI [2.30, 51.97]) in breast cancer detection. However, there were no significant differences between CEUS and SWE in hepatic (DOR = −6.67, 95%CI [−15.08, 1.74]) and thyroid cancer detection (DOR = 3.79, 95%CI [−3.10, 10.68]). Interestingly, ranking analysis showed that CEUS achieved higher DOR in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE achieved higher DOR in detecting hepatic cancer. The overall DOR for CEUS in detecting renal cancer was 53.44, 95%CI [29.89, 95.56] with an AUROC of 0.95, while the overall DOR for SWE in detecting prostate cancer was 25.35, 95%CI [7.15, 89.89] with an AUROC of 0.89. Conclusion: Both diagnostic tests showed relatively high sensitivity and specificity in detecting malignant tumors in different organs. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had higher diagnostic accuracy than SWE in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE had higher accuracy in detecting hepatic cancer. However, the results were not statistically significant in hepatic and thyroid malignancies. Further head-to-head comparisons are needed to confirm the optimal imaging technique to differentiate each cancer type.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6412152
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64121522019-03-19 Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis Huang, Rongzhong Jiang, Lihong Xu, Yu Gong, Yuping Ran, Haitao Wang, Zhigang Sun, Yang Front Oncol Oncology Background: We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and shear wave elastography (SWE) in differentiating benign and malignant lesions in different body sites. Methods: A computerized literature search of Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, and Web of Science was performed using relevant keywords. Following data extraction, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for CEUS, and SWE compared to histopathology as a reference standard. Statistical analyses were conducted by MetaDiSc (version 1.4) and R software (version 3.4.3). Results: One hundred and fourteen studies (15,926 patients) were pooled in the final analyses. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had significantly higher DOR than SWE (DOR = 27.14, 95%CI [2.30, 51.97]) in breast cancer detection. However, there were no significant differences between CEUS and SWE in hepatic (DOR = −6.67, 95%CI [−15.08, 1.74]) and thyroid cancer detection (DOR = 3.79, 95%CI [−3.10, 10.68]). Interestingly, ranking analysis showed that CEUS achieved higher DOR in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE achieved higher DOR in detecting hepatic cancer. The overall DOR for CEUS in detecting renal cancer was 53.44, 95%CI [29.89, 95.56] with an AUROC of 0.95, while the overall DOR for SWE in detecting prostate cancer was 25.35, 95%CI [7.15, 89.89] with an AUROC of 0.89. Conclusion: Both diagnostic tests showed relatively high sensitivity and specificity in detecting malignant tumors in different organs. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had higher diagnostic accuracy than SWE in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE had higher accuracy in detecting hepatic cancer. However, the results were not statistically significant in hepatic and thyroid malignancies. Further head-to-head comparisons are needed to confirm the optimal imaging technique to differentiate each cancer type. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6412152/ /pubmed/30891425 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00102 Text en Copyright © 2019 Huang, Jiang, Xu, Gong, Ran, Wang and Sun. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Huang, Rongzhong
Jiang, Lihong
Xu, Yu
Gong, Yuping
Ran, Haitao
Wang, Zhigang
Sun, Yang
Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis
title Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_full Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_short Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_sort comparative diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and shear wave elastography in differentiating benign and malignant lesions: a network meta-analysis
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6412152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30891425
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00102
work_keys_str_mv AT huangrongzhong comparativediagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedultrasoundandshearwaveelastographyindifferentiatingbenignandmalignantlesionsanetworkmetaanalysis
AT jianglihong comparativediagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedultrasoundandshearwaveelastographyindifferentiatingbenignandmalignantlesionsanetworkmetaanalysis
AT xuyu comparativediagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedultrasoundandshearwaveelastographyindifferentiatingbenignandmalignantlesionsanetworkmetaanalysis
AT gongyuping comparativediagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedultrasoundandshearwaveelastographyindifferentiatingbenignandmalignantlesionsanetworkmetaanalysis
AT ranhaitao comparativediagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedultrasoundandshearwaveelastographyindifferentiatingbenignandmalignantlesionsanetworkmetaanalysis
AT wangzhigang comparativediagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedultrasoundandshearwaveelastographyindifferentiatingbenignandmalignantlesionsanetworkmetaanalysis
AT sunyang comparativediagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedultrasoundandshearwaveelastographyindifferentiatingbenignandmalignantlesionsanetworkmetaanalysis