Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2012 May;81(5):1002-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.112. Epub 2011 Feb 23.

Computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis

Affiliations
Review

Computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis

Ying Yuan et al. Eur J Radiol. 2012 May.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the diagnostic performances of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and positron emission tomography (PET or PET/CT) for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer.

Methods: Relevant studies were identified with MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1990 to July 2010. We estimated the weighted summary sensitivities, specificities, OR (odds ratio), and summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curves of each imaging technique and conducted pair-wise comparisons using the two-sample Z-test. Meta-regression, subgroup analysis, and funnel plots were also performed to explain the between-study heterogeneity.

Results: Eighteen eligible studies were included, with a total of 882 patients. PET or PET/CT was a more accurate modality (sensitivity, 73.2%; specificity, 96.7%; OR [odds ratio], 90.32). No significant difference was detected between CT (sensitivity, 42.6%; specificity, 95.0%; OR, 19.87) and MR imaging (sensitivity, 54.7%; specificity, 88.3%; OR, 12.38). Meta-regression analyses and subgroup analyses revealed no statistical difference. Funnel plots with marked asymmetry suggested a publication bias.

Conclusion: FDG-PET or FDG-PET/CT is more accurate than CT and MR imaging in the detection of lymph node metastasis in patients with ovarian cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

MeSH terms