Literature DB >> 31410683

Reliability of intraoperative ultrasound in detecting tumor residual after brain diffuse glioma surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Gianluca Trevisi1, Paolo Barbone2, Giorgio Treglia3,4,5, Maria Vittoria Mattoli6, Annunziato Mangiola2,6.   

Abstract

Intraoperative ultrasonography (iUS) is considered an accurate, safe, and cost-effective tool to estimate the extent of resection of both high-grade (HGG) and low-grade (DLGG) diffuse gliomas (DGs). However, it is currently missing an evidence-based assessment of iUS diagnostic accuracy in DGs surgery. The objective of review is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of iUS in detecting tumor residue after DGs resection. A comprehensive literature search for studies published through October 2018 was performed according to PRISMA-DTA and STARD 2015 guidelines, using the following algorithm: ("ultrasound" OR "ultrasonography" OR "ultra-so*" OR "echo*" OR "eco*") AND ("brain" OR "nervous") AND ("tumor" OR "tumour" OR "lesion" OR "mass" OR "glio*" OR "GBM") AND ("surgery" OR "surgical" OR "microsurg*" OR "neurosurg*"). Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of iUS in DGs were calculated. A subgroup analysis for HGGs and DLGGs was also conducted. Thirteen studies were included in the systematic review (665 DGs). Ten articles (409 DGs) were selected for the meta-analysis with the following results: sensitivity 72.2%, specificity 93.5%, LR- 0.29, LR+ 3, and DOR 9.67. Heterogeneity among studies was non-significant. Subgroup analysis demonstrates a better diagnostic performance of iUS for DLGGs compared with HGGs. iUS is an effective technique in assessing DGs resection. No significant differences are seen regarding iUS modality and transducer characteristics. Its diagnostic performance is higher in DLGGs than HGGs and could be worsened by previous treatments, surgical artifacts, and small tumor residue volumes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diffuse glioma; Extent of resection; High-grade glioma; Intraoperative ultrasound; Low-grade glioma; Residual tumor

Year:  2019        PMID: 31410683     DOI: 10.1007/s10143-019-01160-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Rev        ISSN: 0344-5607            Impact factor:   3.042


  6 in total

1.  Observation of the impact of the eight-step process combined with the four-track crossover quality control applied to patients with glioma surgery: a randomised trial.

Authors:  Zhen Zhang; Jing Ma; Ying Xu; Huihui Zhang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-04

2.  Intraoperative Ultrasound-Assisted Extent of Resection Assessment in Pediatric Neurosurgical Oncology.

Authors:  Andrea Carai; Alessandro De Benedictis; Tommaso Calloni; Nicola Onorini; Giovanni Paternò; Franco Randi; Giovanna Stefania Colafati; Angela Mastronuzzi; Carlo Efisio Marras
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 3.  Intraoperative MR Imaging during Glioma Resection.

Authors:  Mitsunori Matsumae; Jun Nishiyama; Kagayaki Kuroda
Journal:  Magn Reson Med Sci       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 2.760

4.  Advantages of Using 3D Intraoperative Ultrasound and Intraoperative MRI in Glioma Surgery.

Authors:  Yuanzheng Hou; Jie Tang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-03       Impact factor: 5.738

5.  Navigated 3D ultrasound-guided resection of high-grade gliomas: A case series and review.

Authors:  Ahmed Habib; Nicolina Jovanovich; Meagan Hoppe; N U Farrukh Hameed; Lincoln Edwards; Pascal Zinn
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2022-08-12

Review 6.  Safe surgery for glioblastoma: Recent advances and modern challenges.

Authors:  Jasper Kees Wim Gerritsen; Marike Lianne Daphne Broekman; Steven De Vleeschouwer; Philippe Schucht; Brian Vala Nahed; Mitchel Stuart Berger; Arnaud Jean Pierre Edouard Vincent
Journal:  Neurooncol Pract       Date:  2022-03-02
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.