Bo Xu1, Jun Ma2, Guojing Jiang2, Yu Wang2, Qingliang Ma2. 1. Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
AIM: The study was conducted to assess and compare the overall diagnostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) alone and PET/computed tomography (CT) for the detection of recurrent/metastatic ovarian cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE and Chinese literature databases (CNKI, VIP and Wanfang) up to August 2014 was performed to identify relevant articles. The diagnostic performance of PET alone or PET/CT was assessed in terms of the following evaluation indexes: summary sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve summary receiver operating characteristics. RESULTS: Sixty-four studies with 3722 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Favorable results were obtained for both PET/CT and PET alone with similar sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve in diagnosing recurrent/metastatic ovarian cancer (P > 0.05). However, the sensitivity of PET/CT was significantly higher than PET alone in European patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both PET and PET/CT have promising diagnostic value in recurrent/metastatic ovarian cancer. The diagnostic performance of PET/CT may be superior to PET alone in European patients.
AIM: The study was conducted to assess and compare the overall diagnostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) alone and PET/computed tomography (CT) for the detection of recurrent/metastatic ovarian cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE and Chinese literature databases (CNKI, VIP and Wanfang) up to August 2014 was performed to identify relevant articles. The diagnostic performance of PET alone or PET/CT was assessed in terms of the following evaluation indexes: summary sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve summary receiver operating characteristics. RESULTS: Sixty-four studies with 3722 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Favorable results were obtained for both PET/CT and PET alone with similar sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve in diagnosing recurrent/metastatic ovarian cancer (P > 0.05). However, the sensitivity of PET/CT was significantly higher than PET alone in European patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both PET and PET/CT have promising diagnostic value in recurrent/metastatic ovarian cancer. The diagnostic performance of PET/CT may be superior to PET alone in European patients.