scholarly journals Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Surveillance of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1665
Author(s):  
Dong Hwan Kim ◽  
Sang Hyun Choi ◽  
Ju Hyun Shim ◽  
So Yeon Kim ◽  
Seung Soo Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Meta Regression

Our meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of surveillance magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI) for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and to compare the diagnostic performance of sMRI between different protocols. Original articles about the diagnostic accuracy of sMRI for detecting HCC were found in major databases. The meta-analytic pooled sensitivity and specificity of sMRI for detecting HCC were determined using a bivariate random effects model. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of full MRI and abbreviated MRI protocols were compared using bivariate meta-regression. In the total seven included studies (1830 patients), the pooled sensitivity of sMRI for any-stage HCC and very early-stage HCC were 85% (95% confidence interval, 79–90%; I2 = 0%) and 77% (66–85%; I2 = 32%), respectively. The pooled specificity for any-stage HCC and very early-stage HCC were 94% (90–97%; I2 = 94%) and 94% (88–97%; I2 = 96%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of abbreviated MRI protocols were 87% (80–94%) and 94% (90–98%), values that were comparable with those of full MRI protocols (84% [76–91%] and 94% [89–99%]; p = 0.83). In conclusion, sMRI had good sensitivity for detecting HCC, particularly very early-stage HCC. Abbreviated MRI protocols for HCC surveillance had comparable diagnostic performance to full MRI protocols.

scholarly journals Diagnostic Performance of KLCA-NCC 2018 Criteria for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 1763
Author(s):  
Dong Hwan Kim ◽  
Bohyun Kim ◽  
Seo Yeon Youn ◽  
Hokun Kim ◽  
Joon-Il Choi
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Threshold Effect ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Study Heterogeneity ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Meta Regression Analysis

Several imaging-based systems have been proposed for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), reflecting geographical differences in the clinical environment for HCC. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the performance of the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) 2018 criteria for the MRI diagnosis of HCC. Original studies reporting the performance of the KLCA-NCC 2018 criteria for the diagnosis of HCC using MRI were identified in MEDLINE and EMBASE until 29 March 2021. The meta-analytic pooled sensitivity and specificity of the KLCA-NCC 2018 criteria for diagnosing HCC were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. A meta-regression analysis was performed to explore study heterogeneity further. Eight studies involving 1690 HCCs reported the accuracy of the KLCA-NCC 2018 imaging criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the definite HCC criteria for diagnosing HCC were 81% (95% confidence interval, 76–85%; I2 = 86%) and 90% (86–93%; I2 = 23%), respectively. For five available studies, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the definite HCC criteria for diagnosing HCCs smaller than 20 mm were 80% (72–86%; I2 = 76%) and 91% (86–94%; I2 = 0%), respectively. A considerable threshold effect with a correlation coefficient of 0.667 was observed. The results of the meta-regression analysis revealed that the accuracy of the definite HCC criteria differed significantly depending on the type of MRI contrast agent (p = 0.01). In conclusion, the KLCA-NCC 2018 criteria had good overall diagnostic performance in diagnosing HCC. Substantial study heterogeneity was observed for sensitivity, which was significantly influenced by the type of contrast agent and by a threshold effect.

scholarly journals Meta-Analysis of the Accuracy of Abbreviated Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: Non-Contrast Versus Hepatobiliary Phase-Abbreviated Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 2975
Author(s):  
Dong Hwan Kim ◽  
Sang Hyun Choi ◽  
Ju Hyun Shim ◽  
So Yeon Kim ◽  
Seung Soo Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Hepatobiliary Phase ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Lower Specificity ◽  
Higher Sensitivity

We aimed to determine the performance of surveillance abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (AMRI) for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and to compare the performance of surveillance AMRI according to different protocols. Original research studies reporting the performance of surveillance AMRI for the detection of HCC were identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of surveillance AMRI were calculated using a hierarchical model. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced hepatobiliary phase (HBP)-AMRI and non-contrast (NC)-AMRI were calculated and compared using bivariate meta-regression. Ten studies, including 1547 patients, reported the accuracy of surveillance AMRI. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of surveillance AMRI for detecting any-stage HCC were 86% (95% confidence interval (CI), 80–90%; I2 = 0%) and 96% (95% CI, 93–98%; I2 = 80.5%), respectively. HBP-AMRI showed a significantly higher sensitivity for detecting HCC than NC-AMRI (87% vs. 82%), but significantly lower specificity (93% vs. 98%) (p = 0.03). Study quality and MRI magnet field strength were factors significantly associated with study heterogeneity (p ≤ 0.01). In conclusion, surveillance AMRI showed good overall diagnostic performance for detecting HCC. HBP-AMRI had significantly higher sensitivity for detecting HCC than NC-AMRI, but lower specificity.

The performance of magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of triangular fibrocartilage complex injury: a meta-analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 477-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z. X. Wang ◽  
S. L. Chen ◽  
Q. Q. Wang ◽  
B. Liu ◽  
J. Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Triangular Fibrocartilage Complex ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Complex Injury ◽  
Imaging Results ◽  
Triangular Fibrocartilage

The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of triangular fibrocartilage complex injury through a meta-analysis. A comprehensive literature search was conducted before 1 April 2014. All studies comparing magnetic resonance imaging results with arthroscopy or open surgery findings were reviewed, and 25 studies that satisfied the eligibility criteria were included. Data were pooled to yield pooled sensitivity and specificity, which were respectively 0.83 and 0.82. In detection of central and peripheral tears, magnetic resonance imaging had respectively a pooled sensitivity of 0.90 and 0.88 and a pooled specificity of 0.97 and 0.97. Six high-quality studies using Ringler’s recommended magnetic resonance imaging parameters were selected for analysis to determine whether optimal imaging protocols yielded better results. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of these six studies were 0.92 and 0.82, respectively. The overall accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging was acceptable. For peripheral tears, the pooled data showed a relatively high accuracy. Magnetic resonance imaging with appropriate parameters are an ideal method for diagnosing different types of triangular fibrocartilage complex tears. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level III

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document