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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |