scholarly journals Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and mammography for breast cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Ren ◽  
Yueqiao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Resonance Imaging

scholarly journals Breast cancer and background parenchymal enhancement at breast magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Na Hu ◽  
Jinghao Zhao ◽  
Yong Li ◽  
Quanshui Fu ◽  
Linwei Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
High Background ◽  
Background Parenchymal Enhancement ◽  
Breast Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Parenchymal Enhancement

Abstract Background The background parenchymal enhancement at breast magnetic resonance imaging use to predict breast cancer attracts many searchers to draw a possible relationship. However, the results of their relationships were conflicting. This meta-analysis was performed to assess breast cancer frequency associations with background parenchymal enhancement. Methods A systematic literature search up to January 2020 was performed to detect studies recording associations between breast cancer frequency and background parenchymal enhancement. We found thirteen studies including 13,788 women at the start with 4046 breast cancer. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between breast cancer frequency and background parenchymal enhancement by the dichotomous technique with a random or fixed-effect model. Results Women with minimal or mild background parenchymal enhancement at breast magnetic resonance imaging did not have any risk of breast cancer compared to control women (OR, 1.20; 95% CI 0.54–2.67). However, high background parenchymal enhancement at breast magnetic resonance imaging (OR, 2.66; 95% CI 1.36–5.19) and moderate (OR, 2.51; 95% CI 1.49–4.21) was associated with a significantly higher rate of breast cancer frequency compared to control women. Conclusions Our meta-analysis showed that the women with high and moderate background parenchymal enhancement at breast magnetic resonance imaging have higher risks, up to 2.66 fold, of breast cancer. We suggest that women with high or moderate background parenchymal enhancement at breast magnetic resonance imaging to be scheduled for more frequent follow-up and screening for breast cancer to avoid any complications.

Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for tumour staging of bladder cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 122 (5) ◽  
pp. 744-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niket Gandhi ◽  
Satheesh Krishna ◽  
Christopher M. Booth ◽  
Rodney H. Breau ◽  
Trevor A. Flood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Tumour Staging ◽  
Resonance Imaging

scholarly journals Imaging Modalities for Diagnosis of Deep Pelvic Endometriosis: Comparison between Trans-Vaginal Sonography, Rectal Endoscopy Sonography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging. A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis

Diagnostics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Noventa ◽  
Marco Scioscia ◽  
Michele Schincariol ◽  
Francesco Cavallin ◽  
Giovanni Pontrelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Imaging Modalities ◽  
Transvaginal Sonography ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Pelvic Endometriosis ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Deep Pelvic Endometriosis

Objectives: A meta-analysis, with a head-to-head approach, was carried out to compare the three most common techniques for a deep pelvic endometriosis (DPE) diagnosis. We focused on: transvaginal-sonography (TVS), magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI), and rectal-endoscopy-sonography (RES). Methods: Electronic databases were searched from their inception until December 2018. All prospective and well-defined retrospective studies carried out in tertiary referral centers were considered. This review was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Synthesizing Evidence from Diagnostic Accuracy Tests (SEDATE) guidelines. We considered only papers in which at least two imaging modalities were compared in the same set of patients (head-to-head approach). Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) was performed separately for each location of interest. Bivariate or univariate approach has been applied when appropriate. We analyze the DTA of TVS vs. MRI, TVS vs. RES, and MRI vs. RES. Results: Our meta-analysis (17 studies included) showed high-to-moderate DTA of TVS for all endometriosis locations (apart from recto-vaginal septum (RVS)) that were not statistically different from MRI and RES for those localized in the posterior compartment. RES results were more accurate than MRI for RS lesions but less accurate than TVS for other pelvic locations, except for RVS. Conclusions: All approaches provide good accuracy with specific strong points. Ultrasonography demonstrated a diagnostic accuracy not inferior to MRI and RES; therefore, it must be considered the primary approach for DPE diagnosis. MRI has to be considered as a valuable approach in settings where highly skilled sonographers are not available. Keypoints: (1) We confirmed the non-inferiority of TVS compared to MRI and RES for the diagnosis of specific pelvic anatomic location of endometriosis lesions. (2) Ultrasonography could be considered the primary approach for DPE diagnosis (less invasive than RES and less expensive than MRI). (3) MRI has to be considered as a valuable approach in settings where skilled sonographers are not available.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document