Cargando…
Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis
Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is a reliable and efficient modality for detecting pancreatic tumors; however, plain EUS (P-EUS) is limited with respect to characterization of pancreatic tumors. Recently, the use of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) has increased, a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
2022
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9010094/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35433200 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1782-5033 |
_version_ | 1784687409980506112 |
---|---|
author | Yamashita, Yasunobu Shimokawa, Toshio Ashida, Reiko Napoléon, Bertrand Lisotti, Andrea Fusaroli, Pietro Gincul, Rodica Dietrich, Christoph F. Omoto, Shunsuke Kitano, Masayuki |
author_facet | Yamashita, Yasunobu Shimokawa, Toshio Ashida, Reiko Napoléon, Bertrand Lisotti, Andrea Fusaroli, Pietro Gincul, Rodica Dietrich, Christoph F. Omoto, Shunsuke Kitano, Masayuki |
author_sort | Yamashita, Yasunobu |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is a reliable and efficient modality for detecting pancreatic tumors; however, plain EUS (P-EUS) is limited with respect to characterization of pancreatic tumors. Recently, the use of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) has increased, and its utility for characterization of pancreatic tumors has been reported. This meta-analysis compares the diagnostic ability of P-EUS with that of CH-EUS for characterization of pancreatic tumors. Methods A systematic meta-analysis of all potentially relevant articles in PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Google Scholar databases was performed. Fixed effects or random effects models were used to investigate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio, with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Results This meta-analysis included 719 patients who underwent CH-EUS and 723 who underwent P-EUS, from six eligible studies. The pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 93 % (95 % CI, 0.90–0.95), 80 % (95 % CI, 0.75–0.85), and 57.9 (95 % CI, 25.9–130), respectively, for CH-EUS, and 86 % (95 % CI, 0.82–0.89), 59 % (95 % CI, 0.52–0.65), and 8.3 (95 % CI, 2.8–24.5) for P-EUS. The areas under the summary receiver operating characteristics curves for CH-EUS and P-EUS were 0.96 and 0.80, respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio for pancreatic cancer was 2.98 times higher on CH-EUS than on P-EUS ( P = 0.03). Funnel plots demonstrated no publication bias. Conclusions This meta-analysis demonstrates that CH-EUS has higher diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic cancer than P-EUS, and is thus a valuable tool for characterization of pancreatic tumors. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9010094 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Georg Thieme Verlag KG |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90100942022-04-15 Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis Yamashita, Yasunobu Shimokawa, Toshio Ashida, Reiko Napoléon, Bertrand Lisotti, Andrea Fusaroli, Pietro Gincul, Rodica Dietrich, Christoph F. Omoto, Shunsuke Kitano, Masayuki Endosc Int Open Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is a reliable and efficient modality for detecting pancreatic tumors; however, plain EUS (P-EUS) is limited with respect to characterization of pancreatic tumors. Recently, the use of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) has increased, and its utility for characterization of pancreatic tumors has been reported. This meta-analysis compares the diagnostic ability of P-EUS with that of CH-EUS for characterization of pancreatic tumors. Methods A systematic meta-analysis of all potentially relevant articles in PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Google Scholar databases was performed. Fixed effects or random effects models were used to investigate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio, with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Results This meta-analysis included 719 patients who underwent CH-EUS and 723 who underwent P-EUS, from six eligible studies. The pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 93 % (95 % CI, 0.90–0.95), 80 % (95 % CI, 0.75–0.85), and 57.9 (95 % CI, 25.9–130), respectively, for CH-EUS, and 86 % (95 % CI, 0.82–0.89), 59 % (95 % CI, 0.52–0.65), and 8.3 (95 % CI, 2.8–24.5) for P-EUS. The areas under the summary receiver operating characteristics curves for CH-EUS and P-EUS were 0.96 and 0.80, respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio for pancreatic cancer was 2.98 times higher on CH-EUS than on P-EUS ( P = 0.03). Funnel plots demonstrated no publication bias. Conclusions This meta-analysis demonstrates that CH-EUS has higher diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic cancer than P-EUS, and is thus a valuable tool for characterization of pancreatic tumors. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2022-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9010094/ /pubmed/35433200 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1782-5033 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Yamashita, Yasunobu Shimokawa, Toshio Ashida, Reiko Napoléon, Bertrand Lisotti, Andrea Fusaroli, Pietro Gincul, Rodica Dietrich, Christoph F. Omoto, Shunsuke Kitano, Masayuki Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis |
title | Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis |
title_full | Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis |
title_short | Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis |
title_sort | comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography with and without contrast enhancement for characterization of pancreatic tumors: a meta-analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9010094/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35433200 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1782-5033 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yamashitayasunobu comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT shimokawatoshio comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT ashidareiko comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT napoleonbertrand comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT lisottiandrea comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT fusarolipietro comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT ginculrodica comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT dietrichchristophf comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT omotoshunsuke comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis AT kitanomasayuki comparisonofendoscopicultrasonographywithandwithoutcontrastenhancementforcharacterizationofpancreatictumorsametaanalysis |