Cargando…
Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is the recommended procedure for colorectal cancer (CRC), but majority of the patients were diagnosed with advanced or metastatic CRC. Currently, there were inconsistent results about the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) and computed tomography...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6775409/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31574825 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000017187 |
_version_ | 1783456242478350336 |
---|---|
author | Gao, Yanjun Wang, Jing Lv, Hairong Xue, Yongjie Jia, Rongrong Liu, Ge Bai, Weixian Wu, Yi Zhang, Lang Yang, Junle |
author_facet | Gao, Yanjun Wang, Jing Lv, Hairong Xue, Yongjie Jia, Rongrong Liu, Ge Bai, Weixian Wu, Yi Zhang, Lang Yang, Junle |
author_sort | Gao, Yanjun |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is the recommended procedure for colorectal cancer (CRC), but majority of the patients were diagnosed with advanced or metastatic CRC. Currently, there were inconsistent results about the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) and computed tomography colonography (CTC) in early CRC diagnosis. Our study conducted this meta-analysis to investigate the diagnostic value of MRC and CTC for CRC surveillance. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library to select relevant studies. The summary sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic value of MRC and CTC, respectively. RESULT: Twenty-five studies including 2985 individuals were selected in the final analysis. Eight studies evaluated the diagnostic value of MRC, and 17 studies assessed CTC. The summary sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and AUC in MRC for early detection of CRC were 0.98 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.80–1.00), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.85–0.97), 15.48 (95% CI: 6.30–38.04), 0.02 (95% CI: 0.00–0.25), 115.09 (95% CI: 15.37–862.01), and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.97–0.99), respectively. In addition, the sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and AUC of CTC for diagnosing CRC were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.88–0.99), 0.99 (95% CI: 0.99–1.00), 154.11 (95% CI: 67.81–350.22), 0.03 (95% CI: 0.01–0.13), 642.51 (95% CI: 145.05–2846.02), and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.99–1.00). No significant differences were found between MRC and CTC for DOR in all the subsets. CONCLUSION: The findings of meta-analysis indicated that MRC and CTC have higher diagnostic values for early CRC diagnosis. However, the DOR for diagnosing CRC between MRC and CTC showed no significance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6775409 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67754092019-10-07 Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis Gao, Yanjun Wang, Jing Lv, Hairong Xue, Yongjie Jia, Rongrong Liu, Ge Bai, Weixian Wu, Yi Zhang, Lang Yang, Junle Medicine (Baltimore) 4500 BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is the recommended procedure for colorectal cancer (CRC), but majority of the patients were diagnosed with advanced or metastatic CRC. Currently, there were inconsistent results about the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) and computed tomography colonography (CTC) in early CRC diagnosis. Our study conducted this meta-analysis to investigate the diagnostic value of MRC and CTC for CRC surveillance. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library to select relevant studies. The summary sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic value of MRC and CTC, respectively. RESULT: Twenty-five studies including 2985 individuals were selected in the final analysis. Eight studies evaluated the diagnostic value of MRC, and 17 studies assessed CTC. The summary sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and AUC in MRC for early detection of CRC were 0.98 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.80–1.00), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.85–0.97), 15.48 (95% CI: 6.30–38.04), 0.02 (95% CI: 0.00–0.25), 115.09 (95% CI: 15.37–862.01), and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.97–0.99), respectively. In addition, the sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and AUC of CTC for diagnosing CRC were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.88–0.99), 0.99 (95% CI: 0.99–1.00), 154.11 (95% CI: 67.81–350.22), 0.03 (95% CI: 0.01–0.13), 642.51 (95% CI: 145.05–2846.02), and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.99–1.00). No significant differences were found between MRC and CTC for DOR in all the subsets. CONCLUSION: The findings of meta-analysis indicated that MRC and CTC have higher diagnostic values for early CRC diagnosis. However, the DOR for diagnosing CRC between MRC and CTC showed no significance. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-09-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6775409/ /pubmed/31574825 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000017187 Text en Copyright © 2019 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://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 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 |
spellingShingle | 4500 Gao, Yanjun Wang, Jing Lv, Hairong Xue, Yongjie Jia, Rongrong Liu, Ge Bai, Weixian Wu, Yi Zhang, Lang Yang, Junle Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | diagnostic value of magnetic resonance and computed tomography colonography for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | 4500 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6775409/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31574825 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000017187 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gaoyanjun diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wangjing diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT lvhairong diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT xueyongjie diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jiarongrong diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liuge diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT baiweixian diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wuyi diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhanglang diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yangjunle diagnosticvalueofmagneticresonanceandcomputedtomographycolonographyforthediagnosisofcolorectalcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |