Comparative Assessment of Different Ultrasound Technologies in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author:

Alghamdi Dareen12ORCID,Kernohan Neil3,Li Chunhui4,Nabi Ghulam1

Affiliation:

1. Division of Imaging Sciences and Technology, School of Medicine, Ninewells Hospital, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 9SY, UK

2. Radiology Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 1982, Dammam 31441, Saudi Arabia

3. Department of Pathology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee DD9 1SY, UK

4. School of Science and Engineering, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 4HN, UK

Abstract

The present study aimed to assess the diagnostic test accuracy of different ultrasound scanning technologies in the detection of prostate cancer. A systematic search was conducted using the Cochrane Guidelines for Screening and Diagnostic Tests. We performed a systematic search in the international databases PubMed, Medline, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane Library. Searches were designed to find all studies that evaluated Micro-US, mpUS, SWE and CEUS as the main detection modalities for prostate cancer. This study was registered with Research Registry of systematic review and meta-analysis. The QUADAS-2 tool was utilized to perform quality assessment and bias analysis. The literature search generated 1376 studies. Of these, 320 studies were screened for eligibility, with 1056 studies being excluded. Overall, 26 studies with a total of 6370 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity for grayscale, CEUS, SWE, Micro-US and mpUS modalities were 0.66 (95% CI 0.54–0.73) 0.73 (95% CI 0.58–0.88), 0.82 (95% CI 0.75–0.90), 0.85 (95% CI 0.76–0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.71–1.03), respectively. Moreover, the pooled specificity for grayscale, CEUS, SWE, Micro-US and mpUS modalities were 0.56 (95% CI 0.21–0.90), 0.78 (95% CI 0.67–0.88), 0.76 (95% CI 0.65–0.88), 0.43 (95% CI 0.28–0.59) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.54–0.81), respectively. In terms of sensitivity, substantial heterogeneity between studies was detected (I2 = 72%, p = 0.000 < 0.05). In relation to specificity, extreme heterogeneity was detected (I2 = 93%, p = 0.000 < 0.05). Some studies proved that advanced ultrasound modalities such as mpUS, Micro-US, shear-wave elastography, contrast enhanced and micro-ultrasound are promising methods for the detection of prostate cancer.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3