Meta-analysis of quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in differentiating benign and malignant pancreatic masses
- PMID: 25480596
- DOI: 10.1007/s11596-014-1379-9
Meta-analysis of quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in differentiating benign and malignant pancreatic masses
Abstract
There have been numerous studies done to explore the diagnostic performance of quantitative diffusion-weighted (DW) MR imaging to differentiate between benign and malignant pancreatic masses. However, the results have been inconsistent. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate whether DW-MR imaging can differentiate between these two diseases. Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were utilized to find relevant articles published between January 2001 and January 2014. A Stata version 12.0 and a Meta-Disc version 1.4 were used to describe primary results. Twelve studies with 594 patients, which fulfilled the inclusion criteria, were enrolled for the analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of DW imaging was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.95) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.93) respectively. The area under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristic was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.96). The results indicated that DW imaging might be a valuable tool for differentiating benign and malignant pancreatic masses.
Similar articles
-
Value of diffusion-weighted imaging for the discrimination of pancreatic lesions: a meta-analysis.Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Feb;24(2):134-42. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0b013e32834eff37. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012. PMID: 22241215
-
Value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance images for discrimination of focal benign and malignant hepatic lesions: a meta-analysis.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010 Jul;32(1):130-7. doi: 10.1002/jmri.22211. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010. PMID: 20578019
-
Differential diagnosis of pancreatic cancer by single-shot echo-planar imaging diffusion-weighted imaging.World J Gastroenterol. 2015 May 28;21(20):6374-80. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i20.6374. World J Gastroenterol. 2015. PMID: 26034373 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Diagnostic value of EUS elastography in differentiation of benign and malignant solid pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis.Pancreatology. 2012 Sep-Oct;12(5):402-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2012.07.013. Epub 2012 Jul 22. Pancreatology. 2012. PMID: 23127527
-
Diagnostic Performance of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient for Prediction of Grading of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Pancreas. 2019 Feb;48(2):151-160. doi: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000001212. Pancreas. 2019. PMID: 30640226
Cited by
-
Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) for Distinguishing Metastatic Lymph Nodes from Nonmetastatic Among Patients with Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World J Nucl Med. 2024 Aug 6;24(1):3-12. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1788794. eCollection 2025 Mar. World J Nucl Med. 2024. PMID: 39959143 Free PMC article.
-
Surveillance for neoplasia in the pancreas.Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Dec;30(6):971-986. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.10.013. Epub 2016 Nov 5. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016. PMID: 27938791 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Discrimination of metastatic from non-metastatic mesorectal lymph nodes in rectal cancer using quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2016 Aug;36(4):594-600. doi: 10.1007/s11596-016-1631-6. Epub 2016 Jul 28. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2016. PMID: 27465339
-
Accuracy of quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiating benign and malignant pancreatic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur Radiol. 2021 Oct;31(10):7746-7759. doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07880-3. Epub 2021 Apr 13. Eur Radiol. 2021. PMID: 33847811
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical