TY - JOUR
T1 - Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography and gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in detecting hepatocellular carcinoma
T2 - direct comparison and a meta-analysis
AU - Guo, Jin
AU - Seo, Youngkwon
AU - Ren, Shuo
AU - Hong, Sunwoo
AU - Lee, Dongki
AU - Kim, Soyoun
AU - Jiang, Yuanyuan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, The Author(s).
PY - 2016/10/1
Y1 - 2016/10/1
N2 - The purpose of this study was to directly (head-to-head) compare the per-lesion diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) (also referred to as CT hereafter) and gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (also referred to as MRI hereafter) for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Studies reporting direct per-lesion comparison data of contrast-enhanced multidetector CT and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging that were published between January 2000 and January 2015 were analyzed. The data of each study were extracted. Systematic review, paired meta-analysis, and subgroup analysis were performed. Twelve studies including 627 patients and 793 HCC lesions were analyzed. The sensitivity estimates of MRI and CT were, respectively, 0.86 (95% CI 0.76–0.93) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.58–0.80), with significant difference (P < 0.05). The sensitivity estimates were both 0.94 (95% CI 0.92–0.96) (Chi-square 4.84, degrees of freedom = 1, P > 0.05). In all subgroups, Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging was more sensitive than multidetector CT for the detection of HCC, and specificity estimates of both tests maintained at a similarly high level in all conditions: sensitivity estimates of both tests were reduced in studies where patients were diagnosed with HCC solely by liver explant or in those where HCC lesions were small (≤2 cm, especially when ≤1 cm). But in all situations, sensitivities of MRI were higher than those of CT with or without significance. Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging showed better per-lesion diagnostic performance than multidetector CT for the diagnosis of HCC in patients with cirrhosis and in small hepatic lesions.
AB - The purpose of this study was to directly (head-to-head) compare the per-lesion diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) (also referred to as CT hereafter) and gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (also referred to as MRI hereafter) for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Studies reporting direct per-lesion comparison data of contrast-enhanced multidetector CT and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging that were published between January 2000 and January 2015 were analyzed. The data of each study were extracted. Systematic review, paired meta-analysis, and subgroup analysis were performed. Twelve studies including 627 patients and 793 HCC lesions were analyzed. The sensitivity estimates of MRI and CT were, respectively, 0.86 (95% CI 0.76–0.93) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.58–0.80), with significant difference (P < 0.05). The sensitivity estimates were both 0.94 (95% CI 0.92–0.96) (Chi-square 4.84, degrees of freedom = 1, P > 0.05). In all subgroups, Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging was more sensitive than multidetector CT for the detection of HCC, and specificity estimates of both tests maintained at a similarly high level in all conditions: sensitivity estimates of both tests were reduced in studies where patients were diagnosed with HCC solely by liver explant or in those where HCC lesions were small (≤2 cm, especially when ≤1 cm). But in all situations, sensitivities of MRI were higher than those of CT with or without significance. Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging showed better per-lesion diagnostic performance than multidetector CT for the diagnosis of HCC in patients with cirrhosis and in small hepatic lesions.
KW - Computed tomography
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging
KW - Hepatocellular carcinoma
KW - Meta-analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84975108681&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00261-016-0807-7
DO - 10.1007/s00261-016-0807-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 27318936
AN - SCOPUS:84975108681
SN - 2366-004X
VL - 41
SP - 1960
EP - 1972
JO - Abdominal Radiology
JF - Abdominal Radiology
IS - 10
ER -