摘要
目的:通过循证医学Meta分析方法总结增强MR对肝癌经皮肝动脉化疗栓塞(Transarterial chemoembolization,TACE)术后残余癌及复发癌的诊断价值。方法:在Cochrane图书馆、Pubmed、Embase、Springer及中国数字化期刊网(CNKI)、万方数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)检索关于增强MRI诊断肝癌TACE术后残余癌及复发的中、英文文献。经异质性检验,用统计分析软件计算综合敏感度、特异度及诊断优势比(Diagnostic odds ratio,DOR)。结果:3篇英文文献及3篇中文文献纳入本研究,共315个病灶,各研究间不存在异质性,按照固定效应模型计算,合并后的敏感度、特异度及DOR分别为92%(95%CI:88%~96%)、98%(95%CI:95%~100%)及307.13(95%CI:90.31~1 044.54)。综合受试者工作特征曲线(Summary receiver operating characteristics,SROC)计算曲线下面积(Area under curve,AUC)为0.984 5,Q指数为0.946 0。结论:增强MR对肝脏肿瘤TACE术后残余癌及复发有较高的敏感度和特异度。
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the value of contrast MRI in the detection of residual and recurrent cancer after percutaneous transarterial chemoembolization(TACE) with Meta-analysis methods. Methods: Relevant about Chinese and English studies on diagnosis of residual and recurrent cancer by contrast MRI after TACE in Cochrane liabrary, Pubmed, Embase, Springer, CNKI, Wanfang DATA, CBM were searched. Through the test for heterogeneity, statistical analysis software was utilized to calculate the comprehensive sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio. Result: Three English articles and three Chinese articles were enrolled in this study, with a total of 315 lesions included. There was no heterogeneity between each study and fixed effects model was adopted, with combined sensitivity, specificity, DOR 92%(95%CI: 88%~96%), 98%(95%CI: 95%~100%), 307.13(95%CI: 90.31~1 044.54) comparatively. SROC AUC was 0.984 5, Q index was 0.946 0. Conclusion: Sensitivity and specificity of contrast MR in the diagnosis of residual and recurrent cancer after TACE for liver cancer are high.
关键词
肝肿瘤 /
肿瘤 /
残余 /
Meta分析 /
磁共振成像
Key words
Liver neoplasms /
Neoplasms /
residual /
Meta-analysis /
Magnetic resonance imaging
次旦旺久;卢再鸣;林 坤;王晓明.
增强MRI对肝癌TACE术后残余癌及复发癌诊断的Meta分析[J]. 中国临床医学影像杂志. 2014, 25(8): 563-566
CIDAN Wang-jiu;LU Zai-ming;LIN Kun;WANG Xiao-ming.
Diagnosis of residual and recurrent cancer after TACE of hepatocellular carcinoma by contrast MRI: a Meta analysis[J]. Journal of China Clinic Medical Imaging. 2014, 25(8): 563-566
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}