ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess the accuracy of CT texture analysis (CTTA) for differentiating low-grade and high-grade renal cell carcinoma (RCC).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, OVID Medline, Science Direct and Springer were searched to identify the included studies.Eligibility criteria for including studiesClinical studies that report about the accuracy of CTTA in differentiating low-grade and high-grade RCC.MethodsMultiple databases were searched to identify studies from their inception to 20 October 2021. Two radiologists independently extracted data from the primary studies. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic OR (DOR) were calculated to assess CTTA performance. The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was plotted, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the accuracy of CTTA in grading RCC.ResultsThis meta-analysis included 11 studies, with 1603 lesions observed in 1601 patients. Values of the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR were 0.79 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.84), 0.84 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.87), 5.1 (95% CI 4.0 to 6.4), 0.24 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.32) and 21 (95% CI 13 to 33), respectively. The SROC curve showed that the AUC was 0.88 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.90). Deeks’ test found no significant publication bias among the studies (p=0.42).ConclusionsThe findings of this meta-analysis suggest that CTTA has a high accuracy in differentiating low-grade and high-grade RCC. A standardised methodology and large sample-based study are necessary to certain the diagnostic accuracy of CTTA in RCC grading for clinical decision making.
Can quantitative CT texture analysis be used to differentiate subtypes of renal cell carcinoma?
