Yonghe Zhou1, Wei Shao, Wei Lu1. 1. Department of Clinical Laboratory, The 2nd People's Hospital of Tianjin, Tianjin 300192, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnosis efficacy of endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS) for rectal carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched all the published articles about ERUS in evaluation of rectal carcinoma in the electronic databases. The pooled diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, diagnosis odds ratio, a positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) were calculated by MetaDiSc-1.4 software. RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 1583 subjects meeting the inclusion criteria were recruited in this meta-analysis. For tumor invasion evaluated by ERUS, the pooled diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, diagnosis odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and area under the ROC were 0.95 (0.92-0.97), 0.80 (0.71-0.86), 62.88 (9.30-425.33), 3.66 (2.48-5.39), 0.07 (0.01-0.40), and 0.86; for lymph node involvement evaluated by EU, the pooled diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, diagnosis odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and area under the ROC were 0.58 (0.53-0.63), 0.80 (0.77-0.84), 5.93 (4.07-8.63), 2.85 (2.30-3.52), 0.54 (0.46-0.63) and 0.78. CONCLUSION: ERUS was a good method for the assessment of invasion of rectal tumors and lymph node involvement.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnosis efficacy of endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS) for rectal carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched all the published articles about ERUS in evaluation of rectal carcinoma in the electronic databases. The pooled diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, diagnosis odds ratio, a positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) were calculated by MetaDiSc-1.4 software. RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 1583 subjects meeting the inclusion criteria were recruited in this meta-analysis. For tumor invasion evaluated by ERUS, the pooled diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, diagnosis odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and area under the ROC were 0.95 (0.92-0.97), 0.80 (0.71-0.86), 62.88 (9.30-425.33), 3.66 (2.48-5.39), 0.07 (0.01-0.40), and 0.86; for lymph node involvement evaluated by EU, the pooled diagnosis sensitivity, specificity, diagnosis odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and area under the ROC were 0.58 (0.53-0.63), 0.80 (0.77-0.84), 5.93 (4.07-8.63), 2.85 (2.30-3.52), 0.54 (0.46-0.63) and 0.78. CONCLUSION: ERUS was a good method for the assessment of invasion of rectal tumors and lymph node involvement.
Authors: Dieter Nuernberg; Adrian Saftoiu; Ana Paula Barreiros; Eike Burmester; Elena Tatiana Ivan; Dirk-André Clevert; Christoph F Dietrich; Odd Helge Gilja; Torben Lorentzen; Giovanni Maconi; Ismail Mihmanli; Christian Pallson Nolsoe; Frank Pfeffer; Søren Rafael Rafaelsen; Zeno Sparchez; Peter Vilmann; Jo Erling Riise Waage Journal: Ultrasound Int Open Date: 2019-02-05