4.5 Review

Lymph nodes primary staging of colorectal cancer in 18F-FDG PET/MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01124-4

关键词

PET; MRI; Colorectal; Lymph node metastasis; FDG; Diagnosis; Meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to assess the diagnostic efficacy of 18F-FDG PET/MRI for lymph node (LN) metastasis primary staging in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The analysis showed that 18F-FDG PET/MRI has remarkable diagnostic performance in identifying LN metastases in newly diagnosed CRC patients, and it has great application value for the primary staging of CRC lymph node metastases.
ObjectiveTo assess the diagnostic efficacy of 18F-FDG PET/MRI for lymph node (LN) metastasis primary staging in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).MethodsThis study was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-DTA statement. Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) were searched for studies on 18F-FDG PET/MRI for diagnosing LN metastasis. The pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), and area under the curve (AUC) were applied to assess the diagnostic performance. Heterogeneity was identified and processed using meta-regression and sensitivity analysis. All data analyses were performed via STATA 15 and Meta-Disc 1.4 software.ResultsThere were finally 7 studies included, involving a total of 184 patients. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient was 0.108 (P = 0.818), with no threshold-effect observed. The pooled SEN was 0.81 (95%CI 0.66-0.90) and the SPE was 0.89 (95% CI 0.73-0.96). In sub-groups, prospective groups demonstrated to have the highest SEN of 0.92 (95%CI 0.79-1.00). The studies conducted by Catalano et al. and Kang et al. were considered to be potential sources of heterogeneity.Conclusion18F-FDG PET/MRI has shown remarkable diagnostic performance in identification of LN metastases in newly diagnosed CRC patients. It would be of great application value for the primary staging of CRC lymph node metastases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据