Cargando…

Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Noninvasive imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET), have been involved in increasing evolution to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yin, Qihua, Xu, Huiting, Zhong, Yanqi, Ni, Jianming, Hu, Shudong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8840296/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35148700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09239-3
_version_ 1784650584930910208
author Yin, Qihua
Xu, Huiting
Zhong, Yanqi
Ni, Jianming
Hu, Shudong
author_facet Yin, Qihua
Xu, Huiting
Zhong, Yanqi
Ni, Jianming
Hu, Shudong
author_sort Yin, Qihua
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Noninvasive imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET), have been involved in increasing evolution to detect RCC. This meta-analysis aims to compare to compare the performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in the detection of RCC in humans, and to provide evidence for decision-making in terms of further research and clinical settings. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systemically searched. The keywords such as “magnetic resonance imaging”, “MRI”, “single-photon emission computed tomography”, “SPECT”, “positron emission tomography”, “PET”, “renal cell carcinoma” were used for the search. Studies concerning MRI, SPECT, and PET for the detection of RCC were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve (AUC), etc. were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 44 articles were finally detected for inclusion in this study. The pooled sensitivities of MRI, (18)F-FDG PET and (18)F-FDG PET/CT were 0.80, 0.83, and 0.89, respectively. Their respective overall specificities were 0.90, 0.86, and 0.88. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MRI studies at 1.5 T were 0.86 and 0.94, respectively. With respect to prospective PET studies, the pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0.90, 0.93 and 0.97, respectively. In the detection of primary RCC, PET studies manifested a pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of 0.77, 0.80, and 0.84, respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of PET/CT studies in detecting primary RCC were 0.80, 0.85, and 0.89. CONCLUSION: Our study manifests that MRI and PET/CT present better diagnostic value for the detection of RCC in comparison with PET. MRI is superior in the diagnosis of primary RCC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8840296
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88402962022-02-16 Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis Yin, Qihua Xu, Huiting Zhong, Yanqi Ni, Jianming Hu, Shudong BMC Cancer Research BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Noninvasive imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET), have been involved in increasing evolution to detect RCC. This meta-analysis aims to compare to compare the performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in the detection of RCC in humans, and to provide evidence for decision-making in terms of further research and clinical settings. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systemically searched. The keywords such as “magnetic resonance imaging”, “MRI”, “single-photon emission computed tomography”, “SPECT”, “positron emission tomography”, “PET”, “renal cell carcinoma” were used for the search. Studies concerning MRI, SPECT, and PET for the detection of RCC were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve (AUC), etc. were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 44 articles were finally detected for inclusion in this study. The pooled sensitivities of MRI, (18)F-FDG PET and (18)F-FDG PET/CT were 0.80, 0.83, and 0.89, respectively. Their respective overall specificities were 0.90, 0.86, and 0.88. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MRI studies at 1.5 T were 0.86 and 0.94, respectively. With respect to prospective PET studies, the pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0.90, 0.93 and 0.97, respectively. In the detection of primary RCC, PET studies manifested a pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of 0.77, 0.80, and 0.84, respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of PET/CT studies in detecting primary RCC were 0.80, 0.85, and 0.89. CONCLUSION: Our study manifests that MRI and PET/CT present better diagnostic value for the detection of RCC in comparison with PET. MRI is superior in the diagnosis of primary RCC. BioMed Central 2022-02-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8840296/ /pubmed/35148700 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09239-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Yin, Qihua
Xu, Huiting
Zhong, Yanqi
Ni, Jianming
Hu, Shudong
Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort diagnostic performance of mri, spect, and pet in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8840296/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35148700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09239-3
work_keys_str_mv AT yinqihua diagnosticperformanceofmrispectandpetindetectingrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xuhuiting diagnosticperformanceofmrispectandpetindetectingrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhongyanqi diagnosticperformanceofmrispectandpetindetectingrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT nijianming diagnosticperformanceofmrispectandpetindetectingrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hushudong diagnosticperformanceofmrispectandpetindetectingrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis