Tae-Hyung Kim1,2, Sungmin Woo3, Ijin Joo1,4, Mustafa R Bashir5,6,7,8, Mi-Suk Park9, Lauren M B Burke5,8, Mishal Mendiratta-Lala10, Richard K G Do11. 1. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Naval Pohang Hospital, Pohang, South Korea. 3. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. woos@mskcc.org. 4. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea. 5. Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. 6. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. 7. Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. 8. Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 9. Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 10. Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 11. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis using individual patient data to investigate the diagnostic performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Treatment Response (TR) algorithm for detecting incomplete necrosis on pathology. METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were searched from Jan 1, 2017 until October 14, 2020. Studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of LI-RADS TR algorithm on CT or MRI for detecting incomplete necrosis on pathology as a reference standard were included. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed for locoregional treatment (LRT) type and imaging modality. RESULTS: Six studies (393 patients, 534 lesions) were included. Pooled sensitivity was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43-0.69) and specificity was 0.91 (95%CI 0.84-0.96). Pooled sensitivity was highest using arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) (0.67 [95%CI 0.51-0.81]), followed by washout (0.43 [95%CI 0.26-0.62]) and enhancement similar to pretreatment (0.24 [95%CI 0.15-0.36]). Among lesions with incomplete necrosis, 2% (95%CI 0.00-0.05) manifested as washout but no APHE; 0% (95% CI 0.00-0.02) as enhancement similar to pretreatment without both APHE and washout. Pooled sensitivity was lower after ablation than embolization (0.42 [95%CI, 0.28-0.57] vs. 0.65 [95%CI, 0.53-0.77], p = 0.033). MRI and CT were comparable (p = 0.783 and 0.290 for sensitivity and specificity). CONCLUSIONS: LI-RADS TR algorithm shows moderate sensitivity and high specificity for detecting incomplete necrosis after LRT. APHE is the dominant criterion, a washout contributes to small but meaningful extent, while the contribution of enhancement similar to pretreatment may be negligible. LRT type may affect performance of the algorithm.
PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis using individual patient data to investigate the diagnostic performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Treatment Response (TR) algorithm for detecting incomplete necrosis on pathology. METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were searched from Jan 1, 2017 until October 14, 2020. Studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of LI-RADS TR algorithm on CT or MRI for detecting incomplete necrosis on pathology as a reference standard were included. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed for locoregional treatment (LRT) type and imaging modality. RESULTS: Six studies (393 patients, 534 lesions) were included. Pooled sensitivity was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43-0.69) and specificity was 0.91 (95%CI 0.84-0.96). Pooled sensitivity was highest using arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) (0.67 [95%CI 0.51-0.81]), followed by washout (0.43 [95%CI 0.26-0.62]) and enhancement similar to pretreatment (0.24 [95%CI 0.15-0.36]). Among lesions with incomplete necrosis, 2% (95%CI 0.00-0.05) manifested as washout but no APHE; 0% (95% CI 0.00-0.02) as enhancement similar to pretreatment without both APHE and washout. Pooled sensitivity was lower after ablation than embolization (0.42 [95%CI, 0.28-0.57] vs. 0.65 [95%CI, 0.53-0.77], p = 0.033). MRI and CT were comparable (p = 0.783 and 0.290 for sensitivity and specificity). CONCLUSIONS: LI-RADS TR algorithm shows moderate sensitivity and high specificity for detecting incomplete necrosis after LRT. APHE is the dominant criterion, a washout contributes to small but meaningful extent, while the contribution of enhancement similar to pretreatment may be negligible. LRT type may affect performance of the algorithm.
Authors: Eric C Ehman; Sarah E Umetsu; Michael A Ohliger; Nicholas Fidelman; Linda D Ferrell; Ben M Yeh; Judy Yee; Thomas A Hope Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2016-11
Authors: Mohammad Chaudhry; Katrina A McGinty; Benjamin Mervak; Reginald Lerebours; Cai Li; Erin Shropshire; James Ronald; Leah Commander; Johann Hertel; Sheng Luo; Mustafa R Bashir; Lauren M B Burke Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-12-17 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jorge A Marrero; Laura M Kulik; Claude B Sirlin; Andrew X Zhu; Richard S Finn; Michael M Abecassis; Lewis R Roberts; Julie K Heimbach Journal: Hepatology Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Matthew D F McInnes; David Moher; Brett D Thombs; Trevor A McGrath; Patrick M Bossuyt; Tammy Clifford; Jérémie F Cohen; Jonathan J Deeks; Constantine Gatsonis; Lotty Hooft; Harriet A Hunt; Christopher J Hyde; Daniël A Korevaar; Mariska M G Leeflang; Petra Macaskill; Johannes B Reitsma; Rachel Rodin; Anne W S Rutjes; Jean-Paul Salameh; Adrienne Stevens; Yemisi Takwoingi; Marcello Tonelli; Laura Weeks; Penny Whiting; Brian H Willis Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-01-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Penny F Whiting; Anne W S Rutjes; Marie E Westwood; Susan Mallett; Jonathan J Deeks; Johannes B Reitsma; Mariska M G Leeflang; Jonathan A C Sterne; Patrick M M Bossuyt Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-10-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Erin L Shropshire; Mohammad Chaudhry; Chad M Miller; Brian C Allen; Erol Bozdogan; Diana M Cardona; Lindsay Y King; Gemini L Janas; Richard K Do; Charles Y Kim; James Ronald; Mustafa R Bashir Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 29.146
Authors: Walter L Devillé; Frank Buntinx; Lex M Bouter; Victor M Montori; Henrica C W de Vet; Danielle A W M van der Windt; P Dick Bezemer Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2002-07-03 Impact factor: 4.615