Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Uterine sarcomas are rare; however, they display imaging features that overlap those of leiomyomas. The potential for undetected uterine sarcomas is clinically relevant because minimally invasive treatment of leiomyomas may lead to cancer dissemination. ADC values have shown potential for differentiating benign from malignant uterine masses. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the diagnostic performance of ADC values in differentiating uterine sarcomas from leiomyomas. We searched three electronic databases (the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases) for studies distinguishing uterine sarcomas from leiomyomas using MRI, including ADC values, with pathologic tissue confirmation or imaging follow-up used as the reference standard. Data extraction and QUADAS-2 quality assessment were performed. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using hierarchical models, including bivariate and hierarchical summary ROC models. Metaregression was used to assess the impact of various factors on heterogeneity. Twenty-one studies met the study inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 89% (95% CI, 82-94%) and 86% (95% CI, 78-92%), respectively. The area under the summary ROC curve was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.96). The context of the ADC interpretation (i.e., used as a stand-alone assessment vs integrated as part of multiparametric MRI [mpMRI]) was the only factor found to account significantly for heterogeneity ( = .01). Higher specificity (95% [95% CI, 92-99%] vs 82% [95% CI, 75-89%]) and similar sensitivity (94% [95% CI, 89-99%] vs 88% [95% CI, 82-93%]) were observed when ADC was evaluated among mpMRI features rather than as a stand-alone ADC assessment. ADC cutoff values ranged from 0.87 to 1.29 × 10 mm/s but were not associated with statistically different performance ( = .37). Pooled mean ADC values for sarcomas and leiomyomas were 0.904 × 10 mm/s and 1.287 × 10 mm/s, respectively. As part of mpMRI evaluation of uterine masses, a mass ADC value of less than 0.904 × 10 mm/s may be a useful test-positive threshold for uterine sarcoma, consistent with the findings of a prior expert consensus statement. Institutional protocols may influence locally selected ADC values. Using ADC as part of mpMRI assessment improves detection of uterine sarcoma, which could influence candidate selection for minimally invasive treatments. Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42024499383.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.24.31280 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!