Cargando…

Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Endorectal Ultrasonography (EUS-ERUS) and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are world-wide performed for the local staging of rectal cancer (RC), but no clear consensus on their indications is present, there being literature in support of both. The aim of this meta-analysis is to g...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luglio, Gaetano, Pagano, Gianluca, Tropeano, Francesca Paola, Spina, Eduardo, Maione, Rosa, Chini, Alessia, Maione, Francesco, Galloro, Giuseppe, Giglio, Mariano Cesare, De Palma, Giovanni Domenico
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8775222/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35054171
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010005
_version_ 1784636532897873920
author Luglio, Gaetano
Pagano, Gianluca
Tropeano, Francesca Paola
Spina, Eduardo
Maione, Rosa
Chini, Alessia
Maione, Francesco
Galloro, Giuseppe
Giglio, Mariano Cesare
De Palma, Giovanni Domenico
author_facet Luglio, Gaetano
Pagano, Gianluca
Tropeano, Francesca Paola
Spina, Eduardo
Maione, Rosa
Chini, Alessia
Maione, Francesco
Galloro, Giuseppe
Giglio, Mariano Cesare
De Palma, Giovanni Domenico
author_sort Luglio, Gaetano
collection PubMed
description Background: Endorectal Ultrasonography (EUS-ERUS) and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are world-wide performed for the local staging of rectal cancer (RC), but no clear consensus on their indications is present, there being literature in support of both. The aim of this meta-analysis is to give an update regarding the diagnostic test accuracy of ERUS and pelvic MRI about the local staging of RC. Materials and methods: A systematic literature search from November 2020 to October 2021 was performed to select studies in which head-to-head comparison between ERUS and MRI was reported for the local staging of rectal cancer. Quality and risk of bias were assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. Our primary outcome was the T staging accuracy of ERUS and MRI for which pooled accuracy indices were calculated using a bivariable random-effects model. In addition, a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve (hSROC) was created to characterize the accuracy of ERUS and MRI for the staging of T and N parameters. The area under the hSROC curve (AUC(hSROC)) was determined as a measure of diagnostic accuracy. Results: Seven studies and 331 patients were included in our analysis. ERUS and MRI showed a similar accuracy for the T staging, with AUC(hSROC) curves of 0.91 (95% C.I., 0.89 to 0.93) and 0.87 (95% C.I., 0.84 to 0.89), respectively (p = 0.409). For T staging, ERUS showed a pooled sensitivity of 0.82 (95% C.I. 0.72 to 0.89) and pooled specificity of 0.91 (95% C.I. 0.77–0.96), while MRI had pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.69 (95% C.I. 0.55–0.81) and 0.88 (95% C.I. 0.79–0.93), respectively. ERUS and MRI showed a similar accuracy in the N staging too, with AUC(hSROC) curves of 0.92 (95% C.I., 0.89 to 0.94) and 0.93 (95% C.I., 0.90 to 0.95), respectively (p = 0.389). Conclusions: In conclusion, ERUS and MRI are comparable imaging techniques for the local staging of rectal cancer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8775222
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87752222022-01-21 Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Luglio, Gaetano Pagano, Gianluca Tropeano, Francesca Paola Spina, Eduardo Maione, Rosa Chini, Alessia Maione, Francesco Galloro, Giuseppe Giglio, Mariano Cesare De Palma, Giovanni Domenico Diagnostics (Basel) Systematic Review Background: Endorectal Ultrasonography (EUS-ERUS) and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are world-wide performed for the local staging of rectal cancer (RC), but no clear consensus on their indications is present, there being literature in support of both. The aim of this meta-analysis is to give an update regarding the diagnostic test accuracy of ERUS and pelvic MRI about the local staging of RC. Materials and methods: A systematic literature search from November 2020 to October 2021 was performed to select studies in which head-to-head comparison between ERUS and MRI was reported for the local staging of rectal cancer. Quality and risk of bias were assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. Our primary outcome was the T staging accuracy of ERUS and MRI for which pooled accuracy indices were calculated using a bivariable random-effects model. In addition, a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve (hSROC) was created to characterize the accuracy of ERUS and MRI for the staging of T and N parameters. The area under the hSROC curve (AUC(hSROC)) was determined as a measure of diagnostic accuracy. Results: Seven studies and 331 patients were included in our analysis. ERUS and MRI showed a similar accuracy for the T staging, with AUC(hSROC) curves of 0.91 (95% C.I., 0.89 to 0.93) and 0.87 (95% C.I., 0.84 to 0.89), respectively (p = 0.409). For T staging, ERUS showed a pooled sensitivity of 0.82 (95% C.I. 0.72 to 0.89) and pooled specificity of 0.91 (95% C.I. 0.77–0.96), while MRI had pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.69 (95% C.I. 0.55–0.81) and 0.88 (95% C.I. 0.79–0.93), respectively. ERUS and MRI showed a similar accuracy in the N staging too, with AUC(hSROC) curves of 0.92 (95% C.I., 0.89 to 0.94) and 0.93 (95% C.I., 0.90 to 0.95), respectively (p = 0.389). Conclusions: In conclusion, ERUS and MRI are comparable imaging techniques for the local staging of rectal cancer. MDPI 2021-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8775222/ /pubmed/35054171 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010005 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Luglio, Gaetano
Pagano, Gianluca
Tropeano, Francesca Paola
Spina, Eduardo
Maione, Rosa
Chini, Alessia
Maione, Francesco
Galloro, Giuseppe
Giglio, Mariano Cesare
De Palma, Giovanni Domenico
Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Endorectal Ultrasonography and Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Show Similar Diagnostic Accuracy in Local Staging of Rectal Cancer: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort endorectal ultrasonography and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging show similar diagnostic accuracy in local staging of rectal cancer: an update systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8775222/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35054171
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010005
work_keys_str_mv AT lugliogaetano endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT paganogianluca endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tropeanofrancescapaola endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT spinaeduardo endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT maionerosa endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chinialessia endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT maionefrancesco endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gallorogiuseppe endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gigliomarianocesare endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT depalmagiovannidomenico endorectalultrasonographyandpelvicmagneticresonanceimagingshowsimilardiagnosticaccuracyinlocalstagingofrectalcanceranupdatesystematicreviewandmetaanalysis