Diagnostic Imaging of Colorectal Liver Metastases with CT, MR Imaging, FDG PET, and/or FDG PET/CT: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies Including Patients Who Have Not Previously Undergone Treatment

被引:431
作者
Niekel, Maarten Christian [1 ]
Bipat, Shandra [1 ]
Stoker, Jaap [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
POSITRON-EMISSION-TOMOGRAPHY; SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON-OXIDE; OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC ANALYSIS; HEPATIC LESION DETECTION; SPIO-ENHANCED MRI; HELICAL CT; ARTERIAL PORTOGRAPHY; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; INTRAOPERATIVE ULTRASOUND; MANGAFODIPIR TRISODIUM;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.10100729
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
100231 [临床病理学]; 100902 [航空航天医学];
摘要
Purpose: To obtain diagnostic performance values of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), and FDG PET/CT in the detection of colorectal liver metastases in patients who have not previously undergone therapy. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search was performed for articles published from January 1990 to January 2010 that fulfilled the following criteria: a prospective study design was used; the study population included at least 10 patients; patients had histopathologically proved colorectal cancer; CT, MR imaging, FDG PET, or FDG PET/CT was performed for the detection of liver metastases; intraoperative findings or those from histopathologic examination or follow-up were used as the reference standard; and data for calculating sensitivity and specificity were included. Study design characteristics, patient characteristics, imaging features, reference tests, and 2 3 2 tables were recorded. Results: Thirty-nine articles (3391 patients) were included. Variation existed in study design characteristics, patient descriptions, imaging features, and reference tests. The sensitivity estimates of CT, MR imaging, and FDG PET on a per-lesion basis were 74.4%, 80.3%, and 81.4%, respectively. On a per-patient basis, the sensitivities of CT, MR imaging, and FDG PET were 83.6%, 88.2%, and 94.1%, respectively. The per-patient sensitivity of CT was lower than that of FDG PET (P = .025). Specificity estimates were comparable. For lesions smaller than 10 mm, the sensitivity estimates for MR imaging were higher than those for CT. No differences were seen for lesions measuring at least 10 mm. The sensitivity of MR imaging increased significantly after January 2004. The use of liver-specific contrast material and multisection CT scanners did not provide improved results. Data about FDG PET/CT were too limited for comparisons with other modalities. Conclusion: MR imaging is the preferred first-line modality for evaluating colorectal liver metastases in patients who have not previously undergone therapy. FDG PET can be used as the second-line modality. The role of FDG PET/CT is not yet clear owing to the small number of studies. (C)RSNA, 2010
引用
收藏
页码:674 / 684
页数:11
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]
Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of ROC curves [J].
Arends, L. R. ;
Hamza, T. H. ;
van Houwelingen, J. C. ;
Heijenbrok-Kal, M. H. ;
Hunink, M. G. M. ;
Stijnen, T. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2008, 28 (05) :621-638
[2]
The impact of FDG-PET on the management algorithm for recurrent colorectal cancer [J].
Arulampalam, T ;
Costa, D ;
Visvikis, D ;
Boulos, P ;
Taylor, I ;
Ell, P .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2001, 28 (12) :1758-1765
[3]
Detection of colorectal liver metastases: a prospective multicenter trial comparing unenhanced MRI, MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, and spiral CT [J].
Bartolozzi, C ;
Donati, F ;
Cioni, D ;
Procacci, C ;
Morana, G ;
Chiesa, A ;
Grazioli, L ;
Cittadini, G ;
Cittadini, G ;
Giovagnoni, A ;
Gandini, G ;
Maass, J ;
Lencioni, R .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2004, 14 (01) :14-20
[4]
The value of immunoscintigraphy in the detection of recurrent colorectal cancer [J].
Baulieu, F ;
Bourlier, P ;
Scotto, B ;
Mor, C ;
Eder, V ;
Picon, L ;
De Calan, L ;
Dorval, E ;
Pottier, JM ;
Baulieu, JL .
NUCLEAR MEDICINE COMMUNICATIONS, 2001, 22 (12) :1295-1304
[5]
Belli Giulio, 2002, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg, V9, P607, DOI 10.1007/s005340200082
[6]
Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? [J].
Berlin, JA .
LANCET, 1997, 350 (9072) :185-186
[7]
Prospective study of contrast-enhanced computed tomography, computed tomography during arterioportography, and magnetic resonance imaging for staging colorectal liver metastases for liver resection [J].
Bhattacharjya, S ;
Bhattacharjya, T ;
Baber, S ;
Tibballs, JM ;
Watkinson, AF ;
Davidson, BR .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2004, 91 (10) :1361-1369
[8]
Colorectal liver metastases: CT, MR imaging, and PET for diagnosis - Meta-analysis [J].
Bipat, S ;
van Leeuwen, MS ;
Comans, EFI ;
Pijl, MEJ ;
Bossuyt, PMM ;
Zwinderman, AH ;
Stoker, J .
RADIOLOGY, 2005, 237 (01) :123-131
[9]
Impact of positron emission tomography on strategy in liver resection for primary and secondary liver tumors [J].
Böhm, B ;
Voth, M ;
Geoghegan, J ;
Hellfritzsch, H ;
Petrovich, A ;
Scheele, J ;
Gottschild, D .
JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2004, 130 (05) :266-272
[10]
Bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with sparse data: a generalized linear mixed model approach [J].
Chu, Haitao ;
Cole, Stephen R. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 59 (12) :1331-1332