OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance urography (MRU) and determine its value for detecting ureteric obstruction. METHODS: The electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library, were systematically searched for studies published throughout September 2018. The summary of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was assessed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of MRU. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the mean age of the included patients (adults or children). RESULTS: Eight studies with a total of 594 patients were included. The summary of the sensitivity and specificity of MRU for diagnosing ureteric obstruction was 0.94 and 0.87, respectively. Furthermore, the pooled PLR and NLR were 7.33 and 0.07, respectively. The DOR of MRU for detecting ureteric obstruction was 95.12. In addition, the summary of the area under the ROC of MRU was 0.96. Finally, the specificity, PLR and area under the ROC of MRU for diagnosing ureteric obstruction in adults were higher than children, while the sensitivity of MRU in adults was lower than children. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggested a relatively high diagnostic value of MRU for detecting ureteric obstruction. Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy of MRU in adults was higher than in children. KEY MESSAGE Magnetic resonance urography (MRU) in detecting ureteric obstruction has relatively better sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC. The diagnostic value, including specificity, PLR and AUC of MRU in adults, was higher than in children, while the sensitivity of MRU in adults was lower than in children.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance urography (MRU) and determine its value for detecting ureteric obstruction. METHODS: The electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library, were systematically searched for studies published throughout September 2018. The summary of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was assessed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of MRU. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the mean age of the included patients (adults or children). RESULTS: Eight studies with a total of 594 patients were included. The summary of the sensitivity and specificity of MRU for diagnosing ureteric obstruction was 0.94 and 0.87, respectively. Furthermore, the pooled PLR and NLR were 7.33 and 0.07, respectively. The DOR of MRU for detecting ureteric obstruction was 95.12. In addition, the summary of the area under the ROC of MRU was 0.96. Finally, the specificity, PLR and area under the ROC of MRU for diagnosing ureteric obstruction in adults were higher than children, while the sensitivity of MRU in adults was lower than children. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggested a relatively high diagnostic value of MRU for detecting ureteric obstruction. Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy of MRU in adults was higher than in children. KEY MESSAGE Magnetic resonance urography (MRU) in detecting ureteric obstruction has relatively better sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC. The diagnostic value, including specificity, PLR and AUC of MRU in adults, was higher than in children, while the sensitivity of MRU in adults was lower than in children.
Authors: J Damien Grattan-Smith; Marcos R Perez-Bayfield; Richard A Jones; Stephen Little; Bruce Broecker; Edwin A Smith; Hal C Scherz; Andrew J Kirsch Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2003-03-13
Authors: Javier Zamora; Victor Abraira; Alfonso Muriel; Khalid Khan; Arri Coomarasamy Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2006-07-12 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Penny F Whiting; Marie E Weswood; Anne W S Rutjes; Johannes B Reitsma; Patrick N M Bossuyt; Jos Kleijnen Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2006-03-06 Impact factor: 4.615