Cargando…

Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA)

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems have shown great potential as an effective auxiliary diagnostic tool in breast imaging. Previous studies have shown that S-Detect technology has a high accuracy in the differential diagnosis of breast masses. However, the application of S-Detect in clinical pra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Xiaolei, Meng, Shuang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9410647/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36042648
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000030359
Descripción
Sumario:Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems have shown great potential as an effective auxiliary diagnostic tool in breast imaging. Previous studies have shown that S-Detect technology has a high accuracy in the differential diagnosis of breast masses. However, the application of S-Detect in clinical practice remains controversial, and the results vary among different clinical trials. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect for distinguishing between benign and malignant breast masses. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CBM databases from inception to April 1, 2021. Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA version 14.0 and Meta-Disc version 1.4 softwares. We calculated the summary statistics for sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive, and negative likelihood ratio (LR(+)/LR(−)), diagnostic odds ratio(DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves. Cochran Q-statistic and I(2) test were used to evaluate the potential heterogeneity between studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of single studies on the overall estimate. We also performed meta-regression analyses to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Eleven studies that met all the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 951 malignant and 1866 benign breast masses were assessed. All breast masses were histologically confirmed using S-Detect. The pooled Sen was 0.82 (95% confidence interval(CI) = 0.74–0.88); the pooled Spe was 0.83 (95%CI = 0.78–0.88). The pooled LR( + )was 4.91 (95%CI = 3.75–6.41); the pooled negative LR( − )was 0.21 (95%CI = 0.15–0.31). The pooled DOR of S-Detect in the diagnosis of breast nodules was 23.12 (95% CI = 14.53–36.77). The area under the SROC curve was 0.90 (SE = 0.0166). No evidence of publication bias was found (t = 0.54, P = .61). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicates that S-Detect may have high diagnostic accuracy in distinguishing benign and malignant breast masses.