Sungmin Woo1,2, Chong Hyun Suh2,3, Sang Youn Kim1, Jeong Yeon Cho1,4, Seung Hyup Kim1,4, Min Hoan Moon5. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital and College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 110-744, Korea. 2. 2 Meta-analysis for Imaging Studies on Diagnostic Test Accuracy and prognosiS (MIDAS) Group, Seoul, Korea. 3. 3 Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 4. 4 Institute of Radiation Medicine and Kidney Research Institute, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea. 5. 5 Department of Radiology, Seoul Metropolitan Government-Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of a head-to-head comparison between the performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI; only T2-weighted imaging and DWI) and that of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI; T2-weighted imaging, DWI, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI) for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to November 11, 2017. The search included diagnostic test accuracy studies that compared bpMRI and mpMRI for prostate cancer diagnosis with histopathologic findings from biopsy or radical prostatectomy as the reference standard. Methodologic quality was evaluated with the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled by means of bivariate and hierarchic summary ROC (HSROC) modeling and graphically presented with HSROC plots. Meta-regression analysis and multiple subgroup analyses were used to compare the diagnostic performances of bpMRI and mpMRI. RESULTS: Twenty studies (2142 patients) were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.81) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.86-0.93) for bpMRI and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.69-0.82) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.85-0.93) for mpMRI. MRI protocol (bpMRI vs mpMRI) was not a significant factor in heterogeneity (p = 0.83). In 26 subgroups evaluated on the basis of stratification to clinicopathologic, study, and MRI characteristics, MRI protocol (bpMRI vs mpMRI) was not a significant factor in heterogeneity in any subgroup (p = 0.25-0.97). CONCLUSION: A head-to-head comparison showed that the performance of bpMRI was similar to that of mpMRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Consistent results were found in multiple subgroup analyses.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of a head-to-head comparison between the performance of biparametric MRI (bpMRI; only T2-weighted imaging and DWI) and that of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI; T2-weighted imaging, DWI, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI) for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to November 11, 2017. The search included diagnostic test accuracy studies that compared bpMRI and mpMRI for prostate cancer diagnosis with histopathologic findings from biopsy or radical prostatectomy as the reference standard. Methodologic quality was evaluated with the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled by means of bivariate and hierarchic summary ROC (HSROC) modeling and graphically presented with HSROC plots. Meta-regression analysis and multiple subgroup analyses were used to compare the diagnostic performances of bpMRI and mpMRI. RESULTS: Twenty studies (2142 patients) were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.81) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.86-0.93) for bpMRI and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.69-0.82) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.85-0.93) for mpMRI. MRI protocol (bpMRI vs mpMRI) was not a significant factor in heterogeneity (p = 0.83). In 26 subgroups evaluated on the basis of stratification to clinicopathologic, study, and MRI characteristics, MRI protocol (bpMRI vs mpMRI) was not a significant factor in heterogeneity in any subgroup (p = 0.25-0.97). CONCLUSION: A head-to-head comparison showed that the performance of bpMRI was similar to that of mpMRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Consistent results were found in multiple subgroup analyses.
Entities:
Keywords:
MRI; biparametric; contrast media; gadolinium; meta-analysis; multiparametric; prostate cancer
Authors: Frank-Jan H Drost; Daniël F Osses; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol; Ivo G Schoots Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-04-25
Authors: Alexander P Cole; Bjoern J Langbein; Francesco Giganti; Fiona M Fennessy; Clare M Tempany; Mark Emberton Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Michele Scialpi; Pietro Scialpi; Eugenio Martorana; Riccardo Torre; Antonio Improta; Maria Cristina Aisa; Alfredo D'Andrea; Aldo Di Blasi Journal: Turk J Urol Date: 2021-05
Authors: Anton S Becker; Julian Kirchner; Thomas Sartoretti; Soleen Ghafoor; Sungmin Woo; Chong Hyun Suh; Joseph P Erinjeri; Hedvig Hricak; H Alberto Vargas Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: David Eldred-Evans; Henry Tam; Heminder Sokhi; Anwar R Padhani; Mathias Winkler; Hashim U Ahmed Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 14.432