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
_version_ 1784775142866419712
author Wang, Xiaolei
Meng, Shuang
author_facet Wang, Xiaolei
Meng, Shuang
author_sort Wang, Xiaolei
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9410647
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94106472022-08-26 Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA) Wang, Xiaolei Meng, Shuang Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article 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. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-08-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9410647/ /pubmed/36042648 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000030359 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wang, Xiaolei
Meng, Shuang
Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA)
title Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA)
title_full Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA)
title_fullStr Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA)
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA)
title_short Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA)
title_sort diagnostic accuracy of s-detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: a meta-analysis (prisma)
topic Research Article
url 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
work_keys_str_mv AT wangxiaolei diagnosticaccuracyofsdetecttobreastcanceronultrasonographyametaanalysisprisma
AT mengshuang diagnosticaccuracyofsdetecttobreastcanceronultrasonographyametaanalysisprisma