Cited 5 times in
Diagnostic performance of CT versus MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category 5 for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 이선영 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 김연윤 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 신재승 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 노윤호 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-12-22T04:41:30Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-12-22T04:41:30Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022-10 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0938-7994 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/192192 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objective: To compare the performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category 5 (LR-5) for diagnosing HCC between CT and MRI using comparative studies. Methods: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to April 21, 2021, to identify studies that directly compare the diagnostic performance of LR-5 for HCC between CT and MRI. A bivariate random-effects model was fitted to calculate the pooled per-observation sensitivity and specificity of LR-5 of each modality, and compare the pooled estimates of paired data. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the MRI contrast agent. Results: Seven studies with 1145 observations (725 HCCs) were included in the final analysis. The pooled per-observation sensitivity of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC was higher using MRI (61%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 43-76%; I2 = 95%) than CT (48%; 95% CI, 31-65%; I2 = 97%) (p < 0.001). The pooled per-observation specificities of LR-5 did not show statistically significant difference between CT (96%; 95% CI, 92-98%; I2 = 0%) and MRI (93%; 95% CI, 88-96%; I2 = 16%) (p = 0.054). In the subgroup analysis, extracellular contrast agent-enhanced MRI showed significantly higher pooled per-observation sensitivity than gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for diagnosing HCC (73% [95% CI, 55-85%] vs. 55% [95% CI, 39-70%]; p = 0.007), without a significant difference in specificity (93% [95% CI, 80-98%] vs. 94% [95% CI, 87-97%]; p = 0.884). Conclusions: The LR-5 of MRI showed significantly higher pooled per-observation sensitivity than CT for diagnosing HCC. The pooled per-observation specificities of LR-5 were comparable between the two modalities. Key points: • The pooled sensitivity of LR-5 using MRI was higher than that using CT (61% versus 48%), but the pooled specificities of LR-5 were not significantly different between CT and MRI (96% versus 93%). • Subgroup analysis according to the MRI contrast media showed a significantly higher pooled per-observation sensitivity using ECA-enhanced MRI than with EOB-enhanced MRI (73% versus 55%), and comparable specificities (93% versus 94%). • Although LI-RADS provides a common diagnostic algorithm for CT or MRI, the per-observation performance of LR-5 can be affected by the imaging modality as well as the MRI contrast agent. | - |
dc.description.statementOfResponsibility | restriction | - |
dc.language | English | - |
dc.publisher | Springer International | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY | - |
dc.rights | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Carcinoma, Hepatocellular* / diagnostic imaging | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Contrast Media / pharmacology | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Gadolinium DTPA | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Humans | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Liver Neoplasms* / diagnostic imaging | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Magnetic Resonance Imaging / methods | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Retrospective Studies | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Sensitivity and Specificity | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Tomography, X-Ray Computed / methods | - |
dc.title | Diagnostic performance of CT versus MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category 5 for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.contributor.college | College of Medicine (의과대학) | - |
dc.contributor.department | Dept. of Radiology (영상의학교실) | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Yeun-Yoon Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Sunyoung Lee | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jaeseung Shin | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Won Jeong Son | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Yun Ho Roh | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jeong Ah Hwang | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Ji Eun Lee | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s00330-022-08985-z | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A05659 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A04902 | - |
dc.relation.journalcode | J00851 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1432-1084 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 35849177 | - |
dc.identifier.url | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00330-022-08985-z | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Diagnosis | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Hepatocellular carcinoma | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Magnetic resonance imaging | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Sensitivity and specificity | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Tomography, X-ray computed | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Lee, Sunyoung | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 이선영 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김연윤 | - |
dc.citation.volume | 32 | - |
dc.citation.number | 10 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 6723 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 6729 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, Vol.32(10) : 6723-6729, 2022-10 | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.