META-ANALYSIS: CONTRAST-ENHANCED ULTRASOUND VERSUS CONVENTIONAL ULTRASOUND FOR DIFFERENTIATION OF BENIGN AND MALIGNANT BREAST LESIONS

被引:56
作者
Li, Qian [1 ]
Hu, Min [2 ]
Chen, Zhikui [3 ]
Li, Changtian [4 ]
Zhang, Xi [5 ]
Song, Yiqing [6 ]
Xiang, Feixiang [7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Med Sch, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Radiol, Boston, MA USA
[2] Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, Tongji Hosp, Dept Cardiovasc Surg, Tongji Med Coll, Wuhan, Hubei, Peoples R China
[3] Fujian Med Univ, Union Hosp, Dept Ultrasound, Fuzhou, Fujian, Peoples R China
[4] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Dept Ultrasound, Southern Bldg, Beijing, Peoples R China
[5] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Clin Res Unit, Sch Med, Xin Hua Hosp, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[6] Indiana Univ, Richard M Fairbanks Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Indianapolis, IN 46204 USA
[7] Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, Union Hosp, Dept Ultrasound, Tongji Med Coll, 1277 JieFang Ave, Wuhan 430022, Hubei, Peoples R China
[8] Huazhong Univ Sci & Technol, Union Hosp, Dept Ultrasound, Tongji Med Coll,Hubei Prov Key Lab Mol Imaging, 1277 JieFang Ave, Wuhan 430022, Hubei, Peoples R China
关键词
Breast; Ultrasonography; Contrast; Diagnosis; Meta-analysis; DIAGNOSIS; ELASTOGRAPHY; SONOGRAPHY; MASSES; US; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; VASCULARITY; ACCURACY; EFFICACY; DOPPLER;
D O I
10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2018.01.022
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
This meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), conventional ultrasound (US) combined with CEUS (US + CEUS) and US for distinguishing breast lesions. From thorough literature research, studies that compared the diagnostic performance of CEUS versus US or US + CEUS versus US, using pathology results as the gold standard, were included. Atotal of 10 studies were included, of which 9 compared the diagnostic performance of CEUS and US, and 5 studies compared US + CEUS and US. In those comparing CEUS versus US, the pooled sensitivity was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91-0.95) versus 0.87 (95% CI: 0.85-0.90) and pooled specificity was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.84-0.88) versus 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69-0.75). In studies comparing US + CEUS versus US, the pooled sensitivity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92-0.96) versus 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84-0.90) and pooled specificity was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.89) versus 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76-0.84). In terms of diagnosing breast malignancy, areas under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristic (of both CEUS (p = 0.003) and US + CEUS (p = 0.000) were statistically higher than that of US. Both CEUS alone and US + CEUS had better diagnostic performance than US in differentiation of breast lesions, and US + CEUS also had low negative likelihood ratio. (E-mail: xiangfx@hotmail.com) (c) 2018World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:919 / 929
页数:11
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   Pleural ultrasonography versus chest radiography for the diagnosis of pneumothorax: review of the literature and meta-analysis [J].
Alrajab, Saadah ;
Youssef, Asser M. ;
Akkus, Nuri I. ;
Caldito, Gloria .
CRITICAL CARE, 2013, 17 (05)
[2]  
[Anonymous], CHIN J MED IMAGE
[3]  
[Anonymous], SHANGHAI MED IMAGING
[4]  
[Anonymous], J CLIN ULTRASOUND
[5]   New potential and applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the breast: Own investigations and review of the literature [J].
Balleyguier, Corinne ;
Opolon, Paule ;
Mathieu, Marie Christine ;
Athanasiou, Alexandra ;
Garbay, Jean Remi ;
Delaloge, Suzette ;
Drornain, Clarisse .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2009, 69 (01) :14-23
[6]  
Cosgrove D, 2004, ABDOM IMAGING, V29, P446, DOI 10.1007/s00261-003-0126-7
[7]   Characterization of solid breast masses -: Use of the sonographic breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon [J].
Costantini, Melania ;
Belli, Paolo ;
Lombardi, Roberta ;
Franceschini, Gianluca ;
Mule, Antonino ;
Bonomo, Lorenzo .
JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE, 2006, 25 (05) :649-659
[8]   Solitary pulmonary nodules and masses: a meta-analysis of the diagnostic utility of alternative imaging tests [J].
Cronin, Paul ;
Dwamena, Ben A. ;
Kelly, Aine Marie ;
Bernstein, Steven J. ;
Carlos, Ruth C. .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2008, 18 (09) :1840-1856
[9]   METAANALYSIS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
DERSIMONIAN, R ;
LAIRD, N .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1986, 7 (03) :177-188
[10]  
Drudi FM, 2012, ULTRASCHALL MED, V33, P416, DOI [10.1055/s-0032-1313201, 10.1055/s-0031-1299408]