Wang Hong, Cao Jiazhi, Fan Hongxia, Huang Jianbo, Zhang Huan, Ling Wenwu
Department of Ultrasound, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Department of Ultrasound, Laboratory of Ultrasound Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023 Aug 1;13(8):4919-4932. doi: 10.21037/qims-22-1383. Epub 2023 May 24.
Until now, there has been no systematic review or meta-analysis of direct head-to-head studies that compare two liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) algorithms, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS and contrast-enhanced computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) LI-RADS, for the diagnostic efficacy of hepatocellular carcinoma. The purpose of this study was to identify and head-to-head compare the diagnostic performance of both LI-RADS algorithms for hepatocellular carcinoma.
We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from the inception of each database to April 26, 2022, to find the comparative study of both LI-RADS algorithms for hepatocellular carcinoma at risk of patients who underwent both LI-RADS algorithms. Eligibility criteria included only studies published in English, full reports published, both retrospective and prospective studies. Liver histology or imaging follow-up results served as the reference standard. We analyzed the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve to determine summary estimates. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was utilized to assess the methodological quality.
In 5 included studies (831 patients, 877 lesions), the pooled sensitivity and pooled specificity of CEUS LR-5 were 0.79, 0.81, and 0.78, 0.79 in CT/MRI LR-5, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and pooled specificity of CEUS LR-4/5 were 0.86, 0.70, and 0.93, 0.59 in CT/MRI LR-4/5, respectively. There was no obvious difference between the two LI-RADS algorithms for hepatocellular carcinoma, and there was no significant statistical difference between two LR-M algorithms for non-hepatocellular carcinoma malignancies.
The results of our analysis demonstrated that CEUS LI-RADS has satisfactory diagnostic performance similar to that of CT/MRI LI-RADS, which provides a theoretical basis for the popularization of CEUS LI-RADS for diagnosing HCC. This work was supported by Sichuan Science and Technology Program (No. 2020YFS0211). We registered this study on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42022328107) before the search step.
迄今为止,尚无对两种肝脏影像报告和数据系统(LI-RADS)算法,即对比增强超声(CEUS)LI-RADS和对比增强计算机断层扫描/磁共振成像(CT/MRI)LI-RADS在肝细胞癌诊断效能方面进行直接对比研究的系统评价或荟萃分析。本研究的目的是识别并直接对比两种LI-RADS算法对肝细胞癌的诊断性能。
我们检索了PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆数据库,检索时间从各数据库建库起至2022年4月26日,以查找对接受两种LI-RADS算法的有肝细胞癌风险患者进行两种LI-RADS算法对比研究。纳入标准仅包括以英文发表的研究、已发表的完整报告、回顾性和前瞻性研究。肝脏组织学或影像随访结果作为参考标准。我们分析了敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断比值比和汇总受试者工作特征曲线以确定汇总估计值。采用诊断准确性研究的质量评估来评估方法学质量。
在纳入的5项研究(831例患者,877个病灶)中,CEUS LR-5的合并敏感性和合并特异性分别为0.79、0.81,CT/MRI LR-5的分别为0.78、0.79。CEUS LR-4/5的合并敏感性和合并特异性分别为0.86、0.70,CT/MRI LR-4/5的分别为0.93、0.59。两种LI-RADS算法在肝细胞癌诊断方面无明显差异,两种LR-M算法在非肝细胞癌恶性肿瘤诊断方面也无显著统计学差异。
我们的分析结果表明,CEUS LI-RADS具有与CT/MRI LI-RADS相似的令人满意的诊断性能,这为CEUS LI-RADS在肝细胞癌诊断中的推广提供了理论依据。本研究得到四川省科技计划(编号2020YFS0211)的支持。我们在检索步骤之前已将本研究注册到国际系统评价前瞻性注册库(PROSPERO,CRD42022328107)。