Literature DB >> 34111960

Diagnostic accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in differentiating malignant from benign solid liver lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Farhad Nalaini1, Fatemeh Shahbazi2, Seyedeh Maryam Mousavinezhad3, Ali Ansari4, Mohammadgharib Salehi1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values derived by diffusion-weighted (DW)-MRI in the characterization of solid benign and malignant liver lesions, and to assess their value in discriminating these lesions in daily routine practice.
METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to retrieve studies that used ADC values for differentiating solid benign/dysplastic nodules and malignant liver lesions. A bivariate random-effects model with pooled sensitivity and specificity values with 95% CI (confidence interval) was used. This meta-analysis was performed on the per-lesion basis. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) plot and area under curve (AUC) were created.
RESULTS: A total of 14 original articles were retrieved. The combined (95% CI) sensitivity and specificity of mean ADC values for differentiating solid benign from malignant lesions were 78% (67-86%) and 74% (64-81%), respectively. The pooled (95% CI) positive and negative LRs were respectively 3 (2.3-3.8) and 0.3 (0.21-0.43). The DOR (95% CI) was 10 (7-15). The AUC (95% CI) of the SROC plot was 82% (78-85%). Reporting bias was negligible (p value of regression test = 0.36). Mean size of malignant lesions and breathing pattern of MRI were found to be sources of heterogeneity of pooled sensitivity.
CONCLUSION: ADC measurement independently may not be an optimal diagnostic imaging method for differentiating solid malignant from solid benign hepatic lesions. The meta-analysis showed that ADC measurement had moderate diagnostic accuracy for characterizing solid liver lesions. Further prospective and comparative studies with pre-specified ADC thresholds could be performed to investigate the best MRI protocol and ADC threshold for characterizing solid liver lesions. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: ADC measurement by DW-MRI does not have a good diagnostic performance to differentiate solid malignant from solid benign lesions. Therefore, we suggest not using ADC values in clinical practice to evaluate solid liver lesions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34111960      PMCID: PMC8248227          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.629


  45 in total

1.  Characterization of Liver Tumors by Diffusion-Weighted Imaging: Comparison of Diagnostic Performance Using the Mean and Minimum Apparent Diffusion Coefficient.

Authors:  Tomohiro Namimoto; Masataka Nakagawa; Yuuki Kizaki; Ryo Itatani; Masafumi Kidoh; Daisuke Utsunomiya; Seitaro Oda; Yasuyuki Yamashita
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.826

2.  The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed.

Authors:  Jonathan J Deeks; Petra Macaskill; Les Irwig
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Characterization of focal liver lesions by ADC measurements using a respiratory triggered diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar MR imaging technique.

Authors:  Melanie Bruegel; Konstantin Holzapfel; Jochen Gaa; Klaus Woertler; Simone Waldt; Berthold Kiefer; Alto Stemmer; Carl Ganter; Ernst J Rummeny
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  High-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging of hepatocellular lesions: estimation of grade of malignancy of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Ali Muhi; Tomoaki Ichikawa; Utaroh Motosugi; Katsuhiro Sano; Masanori Matsuda; Takatoshi Kitamura; Tadao Nakazawa; Tsutomu Araki
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.813

5.  Value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance images for discrimination of focal benign and malignant hepatic lesions: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Dong Xia; Jiyong Jing; Haiping Shen; Jianjun Wu
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Diffusion-weighted single-shot echoplanar MR imaging for liver disease.

Authors:  T Kim; T Murakami; S Takahashi; M Hori; K Tsuda; H Nakamura
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Contribution of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the characterization of hepatocellular carcinomas and dysplastic nodules in cirrhotic liver.

Authors:  Peng-Ju Xu; Fu-Hua Yan; Jian-Hua Wang; Yan Shan; Yuan Ji; Cai-Zhong Chen
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.826

8.  ACG clinical guideline: the diagnosis and management of focal liver lesions.

Authors:  Jorge A Marrero; Joseph Ahn; K Rajender Reddy
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  Respiratory gated diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver: value of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in the differentiation between most commonly encountered benign and malignant focal liver lesions.

Authors:  Sofia Gourtsoyianni; Nickolas Papanikolaou; Spyros Yarmenitis; Thomas Maris; Apostolos Karantanas; Nicholas Gourtsoyiannis
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-11-10       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Accuracy of visual analysis vs. apparent diffusion coefficient quantification in differentiating solid benign and malignant focal liver lesions with diffusion-weighted imaging.

Authors:  R Girometti; M Del Pin; S Pullini; L Cereser; G Como; M Bazzocchi; C Zuiani
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 3.469

View more
  5 in total

1.  Utility of diffusion tensor imaging in differentiating benign from malignant hepatic focal lesions.

Authors:  Gehad A Saleh; Ali H Elmokadem; Ahmed Abdel Razek; Ahmed El-Morsy; Omar Hamdy; Elshimaa S Eleraky; Marwa Saleh
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 7.034

2.  Standardised lesion segmentation for imaging biomarker quantitation: a consensus recommendation from ESR and EORTC.

Authors:  Nandita M deSouza; Aad van der Lugt; Christophe M Deroose; Angel Alberich-Bayarri; Luc Bidaut; Laure Fournier; Lena Costaridou; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; Elmar Kotter; Marion Smits; Marius E Mayerhoefer; Ronald Boellaard; Anna Caroli; Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei; Wolfgang G Kunz; Edwin H Oei; Frederic Lecouvet; Manuela Franca; Christian Loewe; Egesta Lopci; Caroline Caramella; Anders Persson; Xavier Golay; Marc Dewey; James P B O'Connor; Pim deGraaf; Sergios Gatidis; Gudrun Zahlmann
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-10-04

3.  Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography to Evaluate Improvement Effect of FXR Regulating Bile Acid on Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Obstructive Jaundice.

Authors:  Liu Wang; Shi Liu; Yuanyuan Li
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 3.009

4.  Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Clinical Potential and Applications.

Authors:  Anna Caroli
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 4.964

5.  Predictive Value of MRI with Serum Lectin-Reactive Alpha-Fetoprotein for Liver Cancer Recurrence after Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation.

Authors:  Guangfeng Zhang; Yongxing Yun; Chunming Lin; Huafeng Li
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 2.650

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.