Assessing diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in detecting small hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis.
|Abstract||This study aimed to compare the diagnostic values of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) in detecting small hepatocellular carcinoma (SHCC).|
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound using SonoVue® (sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles) compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the characterisation of focal liver lesions and detection of liver metastases: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.
|Publication Year Start||2017-01-01|
PMID- 28746202 OWN - NLM STAT- MEDLINE DA - 20170726 DCOM- 20170807 LR - 20170807 IS - 1536-5964 (Electronic) IS - 0025-7974 (Linking) VI - 96 IP - 30 DP - 2017 Jul TI - Assessing diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in detecting small hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis. PG - e7555 LID - 10.1097/MD.0000000000007555 [doi] AB - BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic values of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) in detecting small hepatocellular carcinoma (SHCC). METHODS: A series of related articles from 2001 to 2015 were searched in PubMed and Embase databases. Data from selected articles were pooled to analyze the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve using Meta-DiSc software. Heterogeneity was estimated using chi-based Cochran-Q test and I-statistics, and publication bias was estimated using Egger test in Stata software. RESULTS: In total, 8 high-quality articles based on 623 subjects including 318 SHCC cases were included. For the extracted data, no heterogeneity and publication bias were observed among these studies. The following respective data on CEUS and CECT were pooled: sensitivities: 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.80) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.78); specificity: 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.94) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89-0.95); PLRs: 5.99 (95%CI: 3.28-10.92) and 7.76 (95% CI: 3.12-19.28); NLRs: 0.31 (95% CI: 0.20-0.49) and 0.32 (95% CI: 0.20-0.50); DORs: 27.38 (95% CI: 14.38-52.11) and 30.02 (95% CI: 9.32-96.62). Area under the SROC curve: 0.91 and 0.89 and no significant statistical result was identified between them (Z = 0.23, P = .82). CONCLUSION: CEUS showed a diagnostic ability comparable to that of CECT in detecting SHCC. FAU - Huang, Jiasheng AU - Huang J AD - Department of Interventional Radiology, Huai'an No.1 Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing Medical University, Huai'an, Jiangsu Province, China. FAU - Chen, Wei AU - Chen W FAU - Yao, Shanwen AU - Yao S LA - eng PT - Comparative Study PT - Journal Article PT - Meta-Analysis PL - United States TA - Medicine (Baltimore) JT - Medicine JID - 2985248R RN - 0 (Contrast Media) SB - AIM SB - IM MH - Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/*diagnostic imaging MH - *Contrast Media MH - Humans MH - Liver Neoplasms/*diagnostic imaging MH - *Tomography, X-Ray Computed MH - Tumor Burden MH - *Ultrasonography EDAT- 2017/07/27 06:00 MHDA- 2017/08/08 06:00 CRDT- 2017/07/27 06:00 AID - 10.1097/MD.0000000000007555 [doi] AID - 00005792-201707280-00033 [pii] PST - ppublish SO - Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Jul;96(30):e7555. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007555.