Meta-analysis and systematic review of the diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for the detection of breast cancer

被引:0
|
作者
Liu, Jiulin [1 ,2 ]
Xiao, Ran [3 ]
Yin, Huijia [1 ]
Hu, Ying [1 ]
Zhen, Siyu [1 ]
Zhou, Shihao [1 ,2 ]
Han, Dongming [1 ]
机构
[1] Xinxiang Med Univ, Dept Magnet Resonance Imaging MRI, Affiliated Hosp 1, Weihui, Henan, Peoples R China
[2] Henan Prov Orthoped Hosp, Luoyang Orthoped Traumatol Hosp Henan Prov, Dept Orthoped, Luoyang, Henan, Peoples R China
[3] Xinxiang Med Univ, Dept Resp Med, Affiliated Hosp 1, Weihui, Henan, Peoples R China
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2024年 / 14卷 / 09期
关键词
breast imaging; breast tumours; diagnostic radiology; CONVENTIONAL MAMMOGRAPHY; ACCURACY; CESM; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; PERFORMANCE; LESIONS; MRI;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069788
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective The objective is to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) in the diagnosis of breast cancer.Data sources PubMed, Embase and Cochrane libraries up to 18 June 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies We included trials studies, compared the results of different researchers on CESM in the diagnosis of breast cancer, and calculated the diagnostic value of CESM for breast cancer.Data extraction and synthesis Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) evaluated the methodological quality of all the included studies. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses specification. In addition to sensitivity and specificity, other important parameters were explored in an analysis of CESM accuracy for breast cancer diagnosis. For overall accuracy estimation, summary receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated. STATA V.14.0 was used for all analyses.Results This meta-analysis included a total of 12 studies. According to the summary estimates for CESM in the diagnosis of breast cancer, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.97 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.98) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.85), respectively. Positive likelihood ratio was 4.03 (95% CI 2.65 to 6.11), negative likelihood ratio was 0.05 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.09) and the diagnostic odds ratio was 89.49 (95% CI 45.78 to 174.92). Moreover, there was a 0.95 area under the curve.Conclusions The CESM has high sensitivity and good specificity when it comes to evaluating breast cancer, particularly in women with dense breasts. Thus, provide more information for clinical diagnosis and treatment.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography for Screening Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Zhu, Xiao
    Huang, Jun-ming
    Zhang, Kun
    Xia, Long-jie
    Feng, Lan
    Yang, Ping
    Zhang, Meng-ya
    Xiao, Wei
    Lin, Hui-xia
    Yu, Ying-hua
    [J]. CLINICAL BREAST CANCER, 2018, 18 (05) : E985 - E995
  • [2] Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Suter, Matteo Basilio
    Pesapane, Filippo
    Agazzi, Giorgio Maria
    Gagliardi, Tania
    Nigro, Olga
    Bozzini, Anna
    Priolo, Francesca
    Penco, Silvia
    Cassano, Enrico
    Chini, Claudio
    Squizzato, Alessandro
    [J]. BREAST, 2020, 53 : 8 - 17
  • [3] Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano
    Bignotti, Bianca
    Rossi, Federica
    Signori, Alessio
    Sormani, Maria Pia
    Valdora, Francesca
    Calabrese, Massimo
    Houssami, Nehmat
    [J]. BREAST, 2016, 28 : 13 - 19
  • [4] Contrast-enhanced Mammography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance
    Cozzi, Andrea
    Magni, Veronica
    Zanardo, Moreno
    Schiaffino, Simone
    Sardanelli, Francesco
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2022, 302 (03) : 568 - 581
  • [5] Contrast-enhanced Mammography versus Contrast-enhanced Breast MRI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Potsch, Nina
    Vatteroni, Giulia
    Clauser, Paola
    Helbich, Thomas H.
    Baltzer, Pascal A. T.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2022, 305 (01) : 93 - 105
  • [6] A meta-analysis of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI in the diagnosis of breast cancer
    Xiang, Wanqing
    Rao, Haiying
    Zhou, Liyu
    [J]. THORACIC CANCER, 2020, 11 (06) : 1423 - 1432
  • [7] Contrast-Enhanced Mammography versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Gelardi, Fabrizia
    Ragaini, Elisa Maria
    Sollini, Martina
    Bernardi, Daniela
    Chiti, Arturo
    [J]. DIAGNOSTICS, 2022, 12 (08)
  • [8] Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced mammography for suspicious findings in dense breasts: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Lin, Shu-ting
    Li, Hong-jiang
    Li, Yi-zhong
    Chen, Qian-qian
    Ye, Jia-yi
    Lin, Shu
    Cai, Si-qing
    Sun, Jian-guo
    [J]. CANCER MEDICINE, 2024, 13 (08):
  • [9] Diagnostic Value of Radiomics Analysis in Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography for Identifying Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
    Zhang, Yongxia
    Liu, Fengjie
    Zhang, Han
    Ma, Heng
    Sun, Jian
    Zhang, Ran
    Song, Lei
    Shi, Hao
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2021, 11
  • [10] A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the diagnostic capability of automated breast ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in breast cancer
    Zhang, Haoyu
    Hu, Jingyi
    Meng, Rong
    Liu, Fangfang
    Xu, Fan
    Huang, Min
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2024, 13