Node-RADS: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance, category-wise malignancy rates, and inter-observer reliability.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING European Radiology Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1007/s00330-024-11160-1
Jingyu Zhong, Shiqi Mao, Haoda Chen, Yibin Wang, Qian Yin, Qingqing Cen, Junjie Lu, Jiarui Yang, Yangfan Hu, Yue Xing, Xianwei Liu, Xiang Ge, Run Jiang, Yang Song, Minda Lu, Jingshen Chu, Huan Zhang, Guangcheng Zhang, Defang Ding, Weiwu Yao
{"title":"Node-RADS: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance, category-wise malignancy rates, and inter-observer reliability.","authors":"Jingyu Zhong, Shiqi Mao, Haoda Chen, Yibin Wang, Qian Yin, Qingqing Cen, Junjie Lu, Jiarui Yang, Yangfan Hu, Yue Xing, Xianwei Liu, Xiang Ge, Run Jiang, Yang Song, Minda Lu, Jingshen Chu, Huan Zhang, Guangcheng Zhang, Defang Ding, Weiwu Yao","doi":"10.1007/s00330-024-11160-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate diagnostic performance, category-wise malignancy rates, and inter-observer reliability of Node Reporting and Data System 1.0 (Node-RADS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five electronic databases were systematically searched for primary studies on the use of Node-RADS to report the possibility of cancer involvement of lymph nodes on CT and MRI from January 1, 2021, until April 15, 2024. The study quality was assessed by modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability (QAREL) tools. The diagnostic accuracy was estimated with bivariate random-effects model, while the pooled category-wise malignancy rates were obtained with random-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six Node-RADS-CT studies and three Node-RADS-MRI studies covering nine types of cancer were included. The study quality was mainly damaged by inappropriate index test and unknown timing according to QUADAS-2, and unclear blindness during the rating process according to QAREL. The area under hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve (95% conventional interval) was 0.92 (0.89-0.94) for Node-RADS ≥ 3 as positive and 0.91 (0.88-0.93) for Node-RADS ≥ 4 as positive, respectively. The pooled malignancy rates (95% CIs) of Node-RADS 1 to 5 were 4% (0-10%), 31% (9-58%), 55% (34-75%), 89% (73-99%), and 100% (97-100%), respectively. The inter-observer reliability of five studies was interpreted as fair to substantial.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Node-RADS presented a promising diagnostic performance with an increasing probability of malignancy along higher category. However, the evidence for inter-observer reliability of Node-RADS is insufficient, and may hinder its implementation in clinical practice for lymph node assessment.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question Node-RADS is designed for structured reporting of the possibility of cancer involvement of lymph nodes, but the evidence supporting its application has not been summarized. Findings Node-RADS presented diagnostic performance with AUC of 0.92, and malignancy rates for categories 1-5 ranged from 4% to 100%, while the inter-observer reliability was unclear. Clinical relevance Node-RADS is a useful tool for structured reporting of the possibility of cancer involvement of lymph nodes with high diagnostic performance and appropriate malignancy rate for each category, but unclear inter-observer reliability may hinder its implementation in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-11160-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate diagnostic performance, category-wise malignancy rates, and inter-observer reliability of Node Reporting and Data System 1.0 (Node-RADS).

Methods: Five electronic databases were systematically searched for primary studies on the use of Node-RADS to report the possibility of cancer involvement of lymph nodes on CT and MRI from January 1, 2021, until April 15, 2024. The study quality was assessed by modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability (QAREL) tools. The diagnostic accuracy was estimated with bivariate random-effects model, while the pooled category-wise malignancy rates were obtained with random-effects model.

Results: Six Node-RADS-CT studies and three Node-RADS-MRI studies covering nine types of cancer were included. The study quality was mainly damaged by inappropriate index test and unknown timing according to QUADAS-2, and unclear blindness during the rating process according to QAREL. The area under hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve (95% conventional interval) was 0.92 (0.89-0.94) for Node-RADS ≥ 3 as positive and 0.91 (0.88-0.93) for Node-RADS ≥ 4 as positive, respectively. The pooled malignancy rates (95% CIs) of Node-RADS 1 to 5 were 4% (0-10%), 31% (9-58%), 55% (34-75%), 89% (73-99%), and 100% (97-100%), respectively. The inter-observer reliability of five studies was interpreted as fair to substantial.

Conclusion: Node-RADS presented a promising diagnostic performance with an increasing probability of malignancy along higher category. However, the evidence for inter-observer reliability of Node-RADS is insufficient, and may hinder its implementation in clinical practice for lymph node assessment.

Key points: Question Node-RADS is designed for structured reporting of the possibility of cancer involvement of lymph nodes, but the evidence supporting its application has not been summarized. Findings Node-RADS presented diagnostic performance with AUC of 0.92, and malignancy rates for categories 1-5 ranged from 4% to 100%, while the inter-observer reliability was unclear. Clinical relevance Node-RADS is a useful tool for structured reporting of the possibility of cancer involvement of lymph nodes with high diagnostic performance and appropriate malignancy rate for each category, but unclear inter-observer reliability may hinder its implementation in clinical practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Node-RADS:关于诊断性能、分类恶性率和观察者间可靠性的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的进行一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,以估算Node Reporting and Data System 1.0(Node-RADS)的诊断性能、分类恶性率和观察者间可靠性:系统检索了五个电子数据库,以查找 2021 年 1 月 1 日至 2024 年 4 月 15 日期间使用 Node-RADS 报告 CT 和 MRI 检查淋巴结是否受癌症累及的主要研究。研究质量采用修改后的诊断准确性研究质量评估(QUADAS-2)和诊断可靠性质量评估(QAREL)工具进行评估。采用双变量随机效应模型估算诊断准确性,采用随机效应模型得出合并类别的恶性肿瘤发病率:结果:共纳入 6 项节点-RADS-CT 研究和 3 项节点-RADS-MRI 研究,涵盖 9 种癌症。根据QUADAS-2标准,研究质量主要受到指标检测不当和时间未知的影响,而根据QAREL标准,评级过程中的盲目性不明确。Node-RADS≥3为阳性的分层汇总接收者操作特征曲线下面积(95%常规区间)分别为0.92(0.89-0.94),Node-RADS≥4为阳性的分层汇总接收者操作特征曲线下面积(95%常规区间)分别为0.91(0.88-0.93)。Node-RADS 1 至 5 的汇总恶性率(95% CIs)分别为 4% (0-10%)、31% (9-58%)、55% (34-75%)、89% (73-99%) 和 100% (97-100%)。五项研究的观察者间可靠性被解释为一般到相当高:结论:Node-RADS具有良好的诊断性能,恶性肿瘤的概率随着类别的增加而增加。然而,Node-RADS 的观察者间可靠性证据不足,可能会阻碍其在淋巴结评估临床实践中的应用:问题 Node-RADS 旨在有条理地报告癌症累及淋巴结的可能性,但支持其应用的证据尚未总结。研究结果 Node-RADS 的诊断性能 AUC 为 0.92,1-5 类的恶性率从 4% 到 100% 不等,而观察者之间的可靠性尚不明确。临床意义 Node-RADS是一种有用的工具,可用于结构化报告淋巴结受癌症累及的可能性,其诊断性能高,每个类别的恶性率适当,但观察者之间的可靠性不明确可能会阻碍其在临床实践中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Radiology
European Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
874
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field. This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies. From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Comparison between CT volumetry and extracellular volume fraction using liver dynamic CT for the predictive ability of liver fibrosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Correction: Development and evaluation of two open-source nnU-Net models for automatic segmentation of lung tumors on PET and CT images with and without respiratory motion compensation. Correction: Machine learning detects symptomatic patients with carotid plaques based on 6-type calcium configuration classification on CT angiography. Natural language processing pipeline to extract prostate cancer-related information from clinical notes. ESR Essentials: characterisation and staging of adnexal masses with MRI and CT-practice recommendations by ESUR.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1