Cargando…

Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE: To systematically assess the diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for risk stratification of cystic renal masses. METHODS: We conducted an electronic literature search on Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Qing, Dai, Xiaoli, Li, Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36330503
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.931592
_version_ 1784821912575148032
author Zhang, Qing
Dai, Xiaoli
Li, Wei
author_facet Zhang, Qing
Dai, Xiaoli
Li, Wei
author_sort Zhang, Qing
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To systematically assess the diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for risk stratification of cystic renal masses. METHODS: We conducted an electronic literature search on Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar to identify relevant articles between June 1, 2019 and March 31, 2022 that used the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for risk stratification of cystic renal masses. Summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR−), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled with the bivariate model and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model. The quality of the included studies was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. RESULTS: A total of eight studies comprising 720 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% CI 0.79–0.90) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.58–0.76), respectively, for the class III/IV threshold, with a calculated area under the HSROC curve of 0.84 (95% CI 0.81–0.87). The pooled LR+, LR−, and DOR were 2.62 (95% CI 2.0–3.44), 0.22 (95% CI 0.16–0.32), and 11.7 (95% CI 6.8–20.0), respectively. The Higgins I (2) statistics demonstrated substantial heterogeneity across studies, with an I (2) of 57.8% for sensitivity and an I (2) of 74.6% for specificity. In subgroup analyses, the pooled sensitivity and specificity for CT were 0.86 and 0.71, respectively, and those for MRI were 0.87 and 0.67, respectively. In five studies providing a head-to-head comparison between the two versions of the Bosniak classification, the 2019 version demonstrated significantly higher specificity (0.62 vs. 0.41, p < 0.001); however, it came at the cost of a significant decrease in sensitivity (0.88 vs. 0.94, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Bosniak classification, version 2019 demonstrated moderate sensitivity and specificity, and there was no difference in diagnostic accuracy between CT and MRI. Compared to version 2005, the Bosniak classification, version 2019 has the potential to significantly reduce overtreatment, but at the cost of a substantial decline in sensitivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9623069
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96230692022-11-02 Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis Zhang, Qing Dai, Xiaoli Li, Wei Front Oncol Oncology PURPOSE: To systematically assess the diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for risk stratification of cystic renal masses. METHODS: We conducted an electronic literature search on Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar to identify relevant articles between June 1, 2019 and March 31, 2022 that used the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for risk stratification of cystic renal masses. Summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR−), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled with the bivariate model and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model. The quality of the included studies was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. RESULTS: A total of eight studies comprising 720 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% CI 0.79–0.90) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.58–0.76), respectively, for the class III/IV threshold, with a calculated area under the HSROC curve of 0.84 (95% CI 0.81–0.87). The pooled LR+, LR−, and DOR were 2.62 (95% CI 2.0–3.44), 0.22 (95% CI 0.16–0.32), and 11.7 (95% CI 6.8–20.0), respectively. The Higgins I (2) statistics demonstrated substantial heterogeneity across studies, with an I (2) of 57.8% for sensitivity and an I (2) of 74.6% for specificity. In subgroup analyses, the pooled sensitivity and specificity for CT were 0.86 and 0.71, respectively, and those for MRI were 0.87 and 0.67, respectively. In five studies providing a head-to-head comparison between the two versions of the Bosniak classification, the 2019 version demonstrated significantly higher specificity (0.62 vs. 0.41, p < 0.001); however, it came at the cost of a significant decrease in sensitivity (0.88 vs. 0.94, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Bosniak classification, version 2019 demonstrated moderate sensitivity and specificity, and there was no difference in diagnostic accuracy between CT and MRI. Compared to version 2005, the Bosniak classification, version 2019 has the potential to significantly reduce overtreatment, but at the cost of a substantial decline in sensitivity. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9623069/ /pubmed/36330503 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.931592 Text en Copyright © 2022 Zhang, Dai and Li https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Zhang, Qing
Dai, Xiaoli
Li, Wei
Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Diagnostic performance of the Bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort diagnostic performance of the bosniak classification, version 2019 for cystic renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36330503
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.931592
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangqing diagnosticperformanceofthebosniakclassificationversion2019forcysticrenalmassesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT daixiaoli diagnosticperformanceofthebosniakclassificationversion2019forcysticrenalmassesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liwei diagnosticperformanceofthebosniakclassificationversion2019forcysticrenalmassesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis