Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography Versus Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography for Assessment of Residual Tumor From Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Transarterial Chemoembolization: A Meta-analysis

被引:13
作者
Zhong, Junlin [1 ,3 ]
Su, Zhongzhen [4 ]
Zhang, Yanling [1 ,3 ]
Zhang, Hui [1 ,3 ]
Lin, Peijie [1 ,3 ]
Tang, Xixiang [2 ,3 ]
Zheng, Rongqin [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Affiliated Hosp 3, Dept Ultrasound, 600 Tianhe Rd, Guangzhou 510000, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[2] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Affiliated Hosp 3, Adv Med Ctr, Guangzhou, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[3] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Affiliated Hosp 3, Guangdong Key Lab Liver Dis Res, Guangzhou, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[4] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Affiliated Hosp 5, Dept Ultrasound, Zhuhai, Peoples R China
关键词
abdominal; cancer screening; contrast-enhanced computed tomography; contrast-enhanced ultrasonography; hepatocellular carcinoma; therapeutic; transarterial chemoembolization; tumor ablation; TRANSCATHETER ARTERIAL CHEMOEMBOLIZATION; ULTRASOUND; CT; EMBOLIZATION;
D O I
10.1002/jum.14534
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
ObjectivesThis study reviewed the literature to directly evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) versus contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) for assessing residual tumors of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial chemoembolization. MethodsPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched through April 30, 2017. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated and compared to examine the diagnostic performance of CEUS versus CECT. ResultsA total of 11 studies, including 421 patients and 491 nodules were analyzed. The pooled diagnostic performances of CEUS versus CECT were as follows: (1) sensitivity (95% confidence interval), 0.97 (0.95-0.99) versus 0.72 (0.67-0.76); (2) specificity, 0.86 (0.74-0.94) versus 0.99 (0.95-1.00); (3) positive predictive value, 0.97 (0.95-0.99) versus 1.00 (0.98-1.00); (4) negative predictive value, 0.90 (0.83-0.95) versus 0.51 (0.44-0.58); (5) positive likelihood ratio, 7.79 (4.73-12.82) versus 12.50 (5.74-27.20); (6) negative likelihood ratio, 0.05 (0.03-0.09) versus 0.35 (0.26-0.48); (7) diagnostic odds ratio, 150.56 (57.03-397.49) versus 35.54 (14.89-84.83); and (8) area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.9875 versus 0.9239. The sensitivity and negative predictive value of CEUS were significantly higher than those of CECT (both P<.001). The specificity and positive predictive value of CECT were significantly higher than those of CEUS (both P<.05). ConclusionsContrast-enhanced US, with better sensitivity and negative predictive value versus CECT, was an effective method for exclusion of residual tumors after transarterial chemoembolization. Contrast-enhanced CT, with higher specificity than CEUS, is a valid approach for identifying residual tumors.
引用
收藏
页码:1881 / 1890
页数:10
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   Modified RECIST to assess tumor response after transarterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma: CT-pathologic correlation in 178 liver explants [J].
Bargellini, Irene ;
Bozzi, Elena ;
Campani, Daniela ;
Carrai, Paola ;
De Simone, Paolo ;
Pollina, Luca ;
Cioni, Roberto ;
Filipponi, Franco ;
Bartolozzi, Carlo .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2013, 82 (05) :E212-E218
[2]   HEPATOCELLULAR-CARCINOMA - CT AND MR FEATURES AFTER TRANSCATHETER ARTERIAL EMBOLIZATION AND PERCUTANEOUS ETHANOL INJECTION [J].
BARTOLOZZI, C ;
LENCIONI, R ;
CARAMELLA, D ;
FALASCHI, F ;
CIONI, R ;
DICOSCIO, G .
RADIOLOGY, 1994, 191 (01) :123-128
[3]  
[陈丽羽 Chen Liyu], 2006, [中国超声医学杂志, Chinese Journal of Ultrasonic in Medical], V22, P920
[4]   Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial [J].
Cheng, Ann-Lii ;
Kang, Yoon-Koo ;
Chen, Zhendong ;
Tsao, Chao-Jung ;
Qin, Shukui ;
Kim, Jun Suk ;
Luo, Rongcheng ;
Feng, Jifeng ;
Ye, Shenglong ;
Yang, Tsai-Sheng ;
Xu, Jianming ;
Sun, Yan ;
Liang, Houjie ;
Liu, Jiwei ;
Wang, Jiejun ;
Tak, Won Young ;
Pan, Hongming ;
Burock, Karin ;
Zou, Jessie ;
Voliotis, Dimitris ;
Guan, Zhongzhen .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2009, 10 (01) :25-34
[5]   The usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma viability after transarterial chemoembolization: pilot study [J].
Cho, Youn Zoo ;
Park, So Yeon ;
Choi, Eun Hee ;
Baik, Soon Koo ;
Kwon, Sang Ok ;
Kim, Young Ju ;
Cha, Seung Hwan ;
Kim, Moon Young .
CLINICAL AND MOLECULAR HEPATOLOGY, 2015, 21 (02) :165-174
[6]   Therapeutic effect of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization on hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation with contrast-enhanced harmonic power Doppler ultrasound [J].
Cioni, D ;
Lencioni, R ;
Bartolozzi, C .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2000, 10 (10) :1570-1575
[7]   Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma in USA [J].
El-Serag, Hashem B. .
HEPATOLOGY RESEARCH, 2007, 37 :S88-S94
[8]  
Hihara T, 1992, Radiat Med, V10, P79
[9]  
Huang K, 2015, MOD ONCOL, V23, P2670
[10]   Current consensus and guidelines of contrast enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions [J].
Jang, Jae Young ;
Kim, Moon Young ;
Jeong, Soung Won ;
Kim, Tae Yeob ;
Kim, Seung Up ;
Lee, Sae Hwan ;
Suk, Ki Tae ;
Park, Soo Young ;
Woo, Hyun Young ;
Kim, Sang Gyune ;
Heo, Jeong ;
Baik, Soon Koo ;
Kim, Hong Soo ;
Tak, Won Young .
CLINICAL AND MOLECULAR HEPATOLOGY, 2013, 19 (01) :1-16