Staging of esophageal cancer using PET/MRI: a systematic review with head-to-head comparison.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING BMC Medical Imaging Pub Date : 2025-01-30 DOI:10.1186/s12880-025-01565-9
Alisa Mohebbi, Saeed Mohammadzadeh, Zahra Moradi, Afshin Mohammadi, Hossein Poustchi, Seyed Mohammad Tavangar
{"title":"Staging of esophageal cancer using PET/MRI: a systematic review with head-to-head comparison.","authors":"Alisa Mohebbi, Saeed Mohammadzadeh, Zahra Moradi, Afshin Mohammadi, Hossein Poustchi, Seyed Mohammad Tavangar","doi":"10.1186/s12880-025-01565-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the staging performance of positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) for confirmed esophageal cancer based on the TNM classification system as well as compare it to other alternative modalities (e.g., endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), MRI, and PET/CT) in a full head-to-head manner.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Protocol was pre-registered a priori at ( http://osf.io/6qj5m/ ). We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies until September 10, 2024. The risk of bias was assessed using Modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-Comparative (QUADAS-C). The classification performance of PET/MRI in T, N, and M staging of esophageal cancer and resectability status were evaluated and compared to other relative modalities. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was used for certainty evaluation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies were included with 245 esophageal cancer patients. For T, N, and M staging, PET/MRI showed 9.1%, 2.0%, and 10.7% upstaging than the histopathological evaluation while these numbers were 19.4%, 12.4%, and 5.3% for downstaging. For direct comparison with PET/CT, PET/MRI showed 0.7% and 5.6% less downstaging and upstaging for N staging and 2.5% and 4.0% for M staging. As for predicting resectability status, pre-ADCmean and post-ADCmean were promising, unlike other parameters (i.e., ΔADCmean, pre-SUVmax, post-SUVmax, and ΔSUVmax).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With protocol adjustments, PET/MRI might be utilized in the future for preoperative staging of esophageal cancer.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>N/A.</p>","PeriodicalId":9020,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Imaging","volume":"25 1","pages":"32"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11783729/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-025-01565-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the staging performance of positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) for confirmed esophageal cancer based on the TNM classification system as well as compare it to other alternative modalities (e.g., endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), MRI, and PET/CT) in a full head-to-head manner.

Methods: Protocol was pre-registered a priori at ( http://osf.io/6qj5m/ ). We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies until September 10, 2024. The risk of bias was assessed using Modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-Comparative (QUADAS-C). The classification performance of PET/MRI in T, N, and M staging of esophageal cancer and resectability status were evaluated and compared to other relative modalities. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was used for certainty evaluation.

Results: Nine studies were included with 245 esophageal cancer patients. For T, N, and M staging, PET/MRI showed 9.1%, 2.0%, and 10.7% upstaging than the histopathological evaluation while these numbers were 19.4%, 12.4%, and 5.3% for downstaging. For direct comparison with PET/CT, PET/MRI showed 0.7% and 5.6% less downstaging and upstaging for N staging and 2.5% and 4.0% for M staging. As for predicting resectability status, pre-ADCmean and post-ADCmean were promising, unlike other parameters (i.e., ΔADCmean, pre-SUVmax, post-SUVmax, and ΔSUVmax).

Conclusion: With protocol adjustments, PET/MRI might be utilized in the future for preoperative staging of esophageal cancer.

Clinical trial number: N/A.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Imaging
BMC Medical Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
198
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Imaging is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the development, evaluation, and use of imaging techniques and image processing tools to diagnose and manage disease.
期刊最新文献
Integrating manual annotation with deep transfer learning and radiomics for vertebral fracture analysis. Deep learning radiomics nomogram for preoperatively identifying moderate-to-severe chronic cholangitis in children with pancreaticobiliary maljunction: a multicenter study. Deep learning-based CT-free attenuation correction for cardiac SPECT: a new approach. Impact of early arterial-phase multidetector CT in blunt spleen injury: a clinical outcomes-oriented study. Predictive value of enhanced CT and pathological indicators in lymph node metastasis in patients with gastric cancer based on GEE model.
×
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