scholarly journals Diagnostic utility of endoscopic ultrasonography-elastography in the evaluation of solid pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis and systematic review

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Lu ◽  
Lu Chen ◽  
Chujun Li ◽  
Honglei Chen ◽  
Jinhua Chen
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasonography ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Strain Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Diagnostic Methods ◽  
Pancreatic Masses ◽  
Comprehensive Comparison ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Aim: The accuracy for endoscopic ultrasonography-elastography (EUS-EG) in the evaluation of solid pancreatic masses varies greatly and the pooled results have not been updated since 2013. Also, there still lack a comprehensive comparison among EUS-EG, contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS), and EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA).Material and methods: A thorough search was made for diagnostic trials investigating the role of EUS-EG in solid pancreatic masses. Meta-Disc was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio and summary receiver operator characteristics. Results: Finally, 17 studies (1537 patients, 1544 lesions) were selected. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for qualitative methods were 0.97 (95%CI, 0.95-0.99) and 0.67 (95%CI, 0.59-0.74), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for strain histograms were 0.97 (95%CI, 0.95-0.98) and 0.67(95%CI, 0.61-0.73), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for strain ratio were 0.98 (95%CI, 0.96-0.99) and 0.62 (95%CI, 0.56-0.68), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for CE-EUS were 0.90 (95%CI, 0.83-0.95) and 0.76 (95%CI, 0.67-0.84), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for EUS-FNA were 0.84 (95%CI, 0.77-0.90) and 0.96(95%CI, 0.88-1.00), respectively. Conclusion: EUS-EG is reliable for distinguishing solid pancreatic masses; the sensitivity and specificity for different diagnostic methods were very close. Both EUS-EG and CE-EUS can be valuable complementary supplements for EUS-FNA.

scholarly journals Contrast-Enhanced EUS for Differential Diagnosis of Pancreatic Masses: A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sibin Mei ◽  
Mengyu Wang ◽  
Leimin Sun
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasonography ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Contrast Enhanced ◽  
Pancreatic Masses ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Background. Though methods for the diagnosis of pancreatic masses are various, such as ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT), their sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy are not quite satisfying. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography (CE-EUS), as a new technique, has its own unique advantages in diagnosing pancreatic disease. However, its sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy are still controversial. Objective. To evaluate the accuracy of CE-EUS for differential diagnosis between benign and malignant pancreatic mass lesions. Design. Eighteen relevant articles systemically searched from PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, Scopus, and MEDLINE were selected. The pooled results were calculated in a fixed effects model. Main Outcome Measurement. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (OR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. Results. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of CE-EUS for the differential diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinomas were 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89-0.93), 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.89), and 69.50 (95% CI, 48.89-98.80), respectively. The SROC area under the curve was 0.9545. The subgroup analysis based on excluding the outliers showed that the heterogeneity was eliminated and the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI, 0.90-0.93) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.89), respectively. The SROC area under the curve was 0.9569. Conclusion. CE-EUS is a useful method to distinguish pancreatic adenocarcinoma from other pancreatic diseases. Compared with EUS elastography, it has higher specificity. However, it is still not superior to pathological diagnosis for the identification of pancreatic carcinomas.

scholarly journals Circulating MicroRNA-499 as a Diagnostic Biomarker for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jingyi Zhao ◽  
Hairong Yu ◽  
Peng Yan ◽  
Xiaohui Zhou ◽  
Ying Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Acute Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Troponin T ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Circulating Microrna ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Background. Recent studies have shown that circulating microRNA-499 could be a powerful biomarker of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Interest in circulating microRNA-499 for detecting AMI is increasing rapidly. To evaluate the diagnosis of circulating microRNA-499 for AMI, this study was performed. Methods. We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to December 31, 2018, as well as the reference lists of relevant studies. Studies were included if they assessed the accuracy of blood circulating microRNA-499 or cardiac troponin T (cTnT) for AMI and provided sufficient data to construct a 2×2 contingency table. Extracted data were analysed for sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operator curve (SROC) analyses. Prespecified subgroup analysis and metaregression were also performed. Results. Fourteen studies including 3816 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.84 (95% CI: 0.64-0.94) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.90-0.99), respectively. The area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99). The studies had substantial heterogeneity (I2=98.74%). Seven studies also used cTnT as a marker for the diagnosis of AMI. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of cTnT were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87-0.98) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.85-0.99), respectively. The area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97-0.99). The DOR of circulating miR-499 and cTnT were 188 (95% CI: 19-1815) and 420 (95% CI: 86-2038), respectively. Metaregression analysis suggested that specimen and healthy controls were the main sources of heterogeneity. No publication bias was suggested by Deeks’ regression test of asymmetrical funnel plot (t=0.85; p value = 0.41). Conclusion. The results showed that circulating microRNA-499 is a reliable biomarker for diagnosing AMI patients.

A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW & META-ANALYSIS OF F-18-LABELLED AMYLOID IMAGING IN ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE

2015 ◽  
Vol 86 (11) ◽  
pp. e4.142-e4
Author(s):  
Jing Ming Yeo ◽  
Briony Waddell ◽  
Zubair Khan ◽  
Suvankar Pal
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Amyloid Imaging ◽  
Pittsburgh Compound B ◽  
Analysis Methodology ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

IntroductionThere has been recent interest in the use of fluorine-18-labelled (18F) tracers in amyloid imaging as they have longer half-lives compared to 11C-labelled Pittsburgh compound-B (11C-PIB). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the sensitivity and specificity of 18F tracers florbetapir, florbetaben and flutemetamol in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD).MethodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for relevant studies published from January 1980 to March 2014. We pooled the studies comparing imaging findings in AD and normal controls (NC) in a meta-analysis, calculating the pooled weighted sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (OR) using DerSimonian-Laird random effects model.ResultsA total of nineteen studies investigating 682 patients with AD, met the inclusion criteria; florbetapir (n=10), florbetaben (n=6), flutemetamol (n=3). Our meta-analysis for florbetapir revealed a pooled weighted sensitivity of 89.6%, specificity of 87.2% and diagnostic OR of 91.7 in differentiating AD from NC; and for florbetaben a pooled weighted sensitivity of 89.3%, specificity of 87.6% and diagnostic OR of 69.9.ConclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrated favourable sensitivity and specificity for 18F tracers in diagnosing AD. Further and larger prospective studies are required to establish an optimal imaging analysis methodology for these tracers for consistency and comparability

scholarly journals The Potential Diagnostic Accuracy of Circulating MicroRNAs for Leukemia: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 153303382110119
Author(s):  
Wen-Ting Zhang ◽  
Guo-Xun Zhang ◽  
Shuai-Shuai Gao
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Circulating Micrornas ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Background: Leukemia is a common malignant disease in the human blood system. Many researchers have proposed circulating microRNAs as biomarkers for the diagnosis of leukemia. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of circulating miRNAs in the diagnosis of leukemia. Methods: A comprehensive literature search (updated to October 13, 2020) in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Wanfang database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) was performed to identify eligible studies. The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) for diagnosing leukemia were pooled for both overall and subgroup analysis. The meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to explore heterogeneity and Deeks’ funnel plot was used to assess publication bias. Results: 49 studies from 22 publications with a total of 3,489 leukemia patients and 2,756 healthy controls were included in this meta-analysis. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve were 0.83, 0.92, 10.8, 0.18, 59 and 0.94, respectively. Subgroup analysis shows that the microRNA clusters of plasma type could carry out a better diagnostic accuracy of leukemia patients. In addition, publication bias was not found. Conclusions: Circulating microRNAs can be used as a promising noninvasive biomarker in the early diagnosis of leukemia.

scholarly journals Evaluation of alpha-l-fucosidase for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma based on meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Xi ◽  
Chunqing Yang
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Operating Characteristic ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
Review Manager

AbstractObjectivesThe main aim of the present study was to assess the diagnostic value of alpha-l-fucosidase (AFU) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).MethodsStudies that explored the diagnostic value of AFU in HCC were searched in EMBASE, SCI, and PUBMED. The sensitivity, specificity, and DOR about the accuracy of serum AFU in the diagnosis of HCC were pooled. The methodological quality of each article was evaluated with QUADAS-2 (quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy 2). Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) analysis was performed. Statistical analysis was conducted by using Review Manager 5 and Open Meta-analyst.ResultsEighteen studies were selected in this study. The pooled estimates for AFU vs. α-fetoprotein (AFP) in the diagnosis of HCC in 18 studies were as follows: sensitivity of 0.7352 (0.6827, 0.7818) vs. 0.7501 (0.6725, 0.8144), and specificity of 0.7681 (0.6946, 0.8283) vs. 0.8208 (0.7586, 0.8697), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 7.974(5.302, 11.993) vs. 13.401 (8.359, 21.483), area under the curve (AUC) of 0.7968 vs. 0.8451, respectively.ConclusionsAFU is comparable to AFP for the diagnosis of HCC.

scholarly journals Comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS needles in solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 09 (06) ◽  
pp. E853-E862
Author(s):  
Samuel Han ◽  
Furqan Bhullar ◽  
Omar Alaber ◽  
Ayesha Kamal ◽  
Puanani Hopson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sampling Technique ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Pancreatic Masses ◽  
Quantitative Synthesis ◽  
Made In

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling is the standard of care for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions. While many two-way comparisons between needle types have been made in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is unclear which size and type of needle offers the best probability of diagnosis. We therefore performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare different sized and shaped needles to rank the diagnostic performance of each needle. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases through August, 2020 for RCTs that compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and biopsy (FNB) needles in solid pancreatic masses. Using a random-effects NMA under the frequentist framework, RCTs were analyzed to identify the best needle type and sampling technique. Performance scores (P-scores) were used to rank the different needles based on pooled diagnostic accuracy. The NMA model was used to calculate pairwise relative risk (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals. Results Review of 2577 studies yielded 29 RCTs for quantitative synthesis, comparing 13 different needle types. All 22G FNB needles had an RR > 1 compared to the reference 22G FNA (Cook) needle. The highest P-scores were seen with the 22G Medtronic FNB needle (0.9279), followed by the 22G Olympus FNB needle (0.8962) and the 22G Boston Scientific FNB needle (0.8739). Diagnostic accuracy was not significantly different between needles with or without suction. Conclusions In comparison to FNA needles, FNB needles offer the highest diagnostic performance in sampling pancreatic masses, particularly with 22G FNB needles.

scholarly journals Clinical utility of microRNA-451 as diagnostic biomarker for human cancers

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhanzhan Li ◽  
Yanyan Li ◽  
Jun Fu ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Liangfang Shen
Keyword(s):  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Ability ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

AbstractWe conducted comprehensive analyses to assess the diagnostic ability of miRNA-451 in cancers. A systematic online search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, China’s national knowledge infrastructure, and VIP databases from inception to July 31, 2017. The bivariate random effect model was used for calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under cure (AUC). The whole pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (0.77–0.90) and 0.85 (0.78–0.90) with their 95% confidence interval (95%CI), respectively. The pooled AUC was 0.91 (95%CI: 0.89–0.94). Positive likelihood ratio was 5.57 (95%CI: 3.74–8.31), negative likelihood ratio was 0.18 (95%CI: 0.11–0.28), and diagnostic odds ratio was 31.33 (95%CI: 15.19–64.61). Among Asian population, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95%CI: 0.77–0.91) and 0.86 (95%CI: 0.78–0.91), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were 5.87 (95%CI: 3.78–9.12) and 0.17 (95%CI: 0.11–0.28). The diagnostic odds ratio and AUC were 34.31 (15.51–75.91) and 0.92 (0.89–0.94). The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and AUC for digestive system cancer were 0.83, 0.88, 6.87, 0.20, 35.13, and 0.92, respectively. The other cancers were 0.87, 0.81, 4.55, 0.16, 28.51, and 0.90, respectively. For sample source, the results still remain consistent. Our results indicated miRNA-451 has a moderate diagnostic ability for cancers, and could be a potential early screening biomarker, and considered as an adjuvant diagnostic index when being combined with other clinical examinations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document