双能减影射线摄影(DESR):肺结节检测的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Clinical radiology Pub Date : 2024-09-28 DOI:10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.015
M Frenkel, S Iyer, R Antar, A Akram, S M Lee, J Lichtenberger, B Shin
{"title":"双能减影射线摄影(DESR):肺结节检测的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"M Frenkel, S Iyer, R Antar, A Akram, S M Lee, J Lichtenberger, B Shin","doi":"10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study examined the literature to compare the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of dual-energy subtraction radiography (DESR) with conventional radiography (CR) in the detection of pulmonary nodules. To our knowledge, no meta-analysis has been conducted to compare DESR with CR.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The authors searched Pubmed using the terms \"Dual-energy subtraction radiography,\" and \"Dual-Energy Chest Radiography.\" Only studies comparing the detection of pulmonary nodules between DESR and CR were included. Studies utilizing artificial intelligence were excluded. The primary study outcomes analyzed were the mean difference of receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC), mean difference of sensitivity, and mean difference of specificity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-three studies between 1994 and 2022 were included. Of these twenty-three, eighteen reported ROC AUC statistics. The difference between DESR ROC AUC (mean = 0.7702, SD = 0.1361) and CR ROC AUC (mean = 0.7106, SD = 0.1183) was 0.0597 (P<0.001). Sensitivity data was reported for thirteen of the twenty-three selected studies. The difference between DESR sensitivity (mean = 0.5753, SD = 0.1546) and CR sensitivity (mean = 0.4391, SD = 0.1007) was 0.136 (P<0.001). Specificity data were reported for ten of the twenty-three selected studies. The difference between DESR specificity (mean = 0.753, SD = 0.1575) and CR specificity (mean = 0.764, SD = 0.1168) was -0.011 (P=0.767). This was not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DESR showed superior sensitivity and ROC AUC values compared with CR in detecting pulmonary nodules. There was no difference in specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":10695,"journal":{"name":"Clinical radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dual-energy subtraction radiography (DESR): a systematic review and meta-analysis of pulmonary nodule detection.\",\"authors\":\"M Frenkel, S Iyer, R Antar, A Akram, S M Lee, J Lichtenberger, B Shin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study examined the literature to compare the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of dual-energy subtraction radiography (DESR) with conventional radiography (CR) in the detection of pulmonary nodules. To our knowledge, no meta-analysis has been conducted to compare DESR with CR.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The authors searched Pubmed using the terms \\\"Dual-energy subtraction radiography,\\\" and \\\"Dual-Energy Chest Radiography.\\\" Only studies comparing the detection of pulmonary nodules between DESR and CR were included. Studies utilizing artificial intelligence were excluded. The primary study outcomes analyzed were the mean difference of receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC), mean difference of sensitivity, and mean difference of specificity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-three studies between 1994 and 2022 were included. Of these twenty-three, eighteen reported ROC AUC statistics. The difference between DESR ROC AUC (mean = 0.7702, SD = 0.1361) and CR ROC AUC (mean = 0.7106, SD = 0.1183) was 0.0597 (P<0.001). Sensitivity data was reported for thirteen of the twenty-three selected studies. The difference between DESR sensitivity (mean = 0.5753, SD = 0.1546) and CR sensitivity (mean = 0.4391, SD = 0.1007) was 0.136 (P<0.001). Specificity data were reported for ten of the twenty-three selected studies. The difference between DESR specificity (mean = 0.753, SD = 0.1575) and CR specificity (mean = 0.764, SD = 0.1168) was -0.011 (P=0.767). This was not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DESR showed superior sensitivity and ROC AUC values compared with CR in detecting pulmonary nodules. There was no difference in specificity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10695,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical radiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.015\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2024.09.015","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

摘要

目的:本研究对文献进行了研究,以比较双能减影射线摄影术(DESR)与传统射线摄影术(CR)在检测肺结节方面的准确性、敏感性和特异性。据我们所知,还没有对 DESR 和 CR 进行过荟萃分析比较:作者使用 "双能量减影射线照相术 "和 "双能量胸部射线照相术 "这两个词对 Pubmed 进行了检索。只纳入了比较 DESR 和 CR 检测肺结节的研究。使用人工智能的研究未包括在内。分析的主要研究结果是曲线下接收器操作特征区域(ROC AUC)的平均差异、灵敏度的平均差异和特异性的平均差异:结果:共纳入了 1994 年至 2022 年间的 23 项研究。在这 23 项研究中,18 项报告了 ROC AUC 统计数据。DESR的ROC AUC(平均值=0.7702,SD=0.1361)与CR的ROC AUC(平均值=0.7106,SD=0.1183)之差为0.0597(PConclusions:在检测肺结节方面,DESR 的灵敏度和 ROC AUC 值均优于 CR。特异性没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Dual-energy subtraction radiography (DESR): a systematic review and meta-analysis of pulmonary nodule detection.

Purpose: This study examined the literature to compare the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of dual-energy subtraction radiography (DESR) with conventional radiography (CR) in the detection of pulmonary nodules. To our knowledge, no meta-analysis has been conducted to compare DESR with CR.

Material and methods: The authors searched Pubmed using the terms "Dual-energy subtraction radiography," and "Dual-Energy Chest Radiography." Only studies comparing the detection of pulmonary nodules between DESR and CR were included. Studies utilizing artificial intelligence were excluded. The primary study outcomes analyzed were the mean difference of receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC), mean difference of sensitivity, and mean difference of specificity.

Results: Twenty-three studies between 1994 and 2022 were included. Of these twenty-three, eighteen reported ROC AUC statistics. The difference between DESR ROC AUC (mean = 0.7702, SD = 0.1361) and CR ROC AUC (mean = 0.7106, SD = 0.1183) was 0.0597 (P<0.001). Sensitivity data was reported for thirteen of the twenty-three selected studies. The difference between DESR sensitivity (mean = 0.5753, SD = 0.1546) and CR sensitivity (mean = 0.4391, SD = 0.1007) was 0.136 (P<0.001). Specificity data were reported for ten of the twenty-three selected studies. The difference between DESR specificity (mean = 0.753, SD = 0.1575) and CR specificity (mean = 0.764, SD = 0.1168) was -0.011 (P=0.767). This was not statistically significant.

Conclusions: DESR showed superior sensitivity and ROC AUC values compared with CR in detecting pulmonary nodules. There was no difference in specificity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical radiology
Clinical radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.80%
发文量
528
审稿时长
76 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Radiology is published by Elsevier on behalf of The Royal College of Radiologists. Clinical Radiology is an International Journal bringing you original research, editorials and review articles on all aspects of diagnostic imaging, including: • Computed tomography • Magnetic resonance imaging • Ultrasonography • Digital radiology • Interventional radiology • Radiography • Nuclear medicine Papers on radiological protection, quality assurance, audit in radiology and matters relating to radiological training and education are also included. In addition, each issue contains correspondence, book reviews and notices of forthcoming events.
期刊最新文献
Contents RCR meetings Classifying, recognizing, and troubleshooting errors in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided breast biopsies. Radiation dose to health care workers measured by thermoluminescent dosimetry. Dual-energy subtraction radiography (DESR): a systematic review and meta-analysis of pulmonary nodule detection.
×
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