Computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 81, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1002-1006

  Yuan, Ying ^a   Gu, Zhao Xiang ^b   Tao, Xiao Feng ^a   Liu, Shi Yuan ^a  

^a SECOND MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b FUDAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Computer tomography; Lymph nodes; Magnetic resonance imaging; Meta analysis; Ovarian cancer; Positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EMBASE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVARY CANCER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

CARCINOMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREVALENCE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84859958135     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.112     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bristow RE, Duska LR, Lambrou NC, et al. A model for predicting surgical outcome in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma using computed tomography. Cancer 2000;89:1532-40.
2. Parazzini F, Valsecchi G, Bolis G, et al. Pelvic and paraortic lymph nodal status in advanced ovarian cancer and survival. Gynecol Oncol 1999;74:7-11. (Pubitemid 29331161)
3. Pereira A, Magrina JF, Rey V, Cortes M, Magtibay PM. Pelvic and aortic lymph node metastasis in epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007;105:604-8. (Pubitemid 46734179)
4. Vergote I, De Brabanter J, Fyles A, et al. Prognostic importance of degree of differentiation and cyst rupture in stage I invasive epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Lancet 2001;357:176-82. (Pubitemid 32108089)
5. Dewdney SB, Rimel BJ, Reinhart AJ, et al. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the management of patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer: survey results from members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists. Gynecol Oncol 2010;119:18-21.
6. McMahon CJ, Rofsky NM, Pedrosa I. Lymphatic metastases from pelvic tumors: anatomic classification, characterization, and staging. Radiology 2010;254:31-46.
7. Prakash P, Cronin CG, Blake MA. Role of PET/CT in ovarian cancer. Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:W464-70.
8. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:31.
9. Snaky SS, Weistfiels LA, Fine MJ, Kapoor W. An assessment of the use of the continuity correction for sparse data in meta analysis. Commun Stat Simul Comput 1996;25:1031-56. (Pubitemid 126434250)
10. Bristow RE, Giuntoli RL, Pannu HK, Schulick RD, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Combined PET/CT for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer limited to retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Gynecol Oncol 2005;99:294-300. (Pubitemid 41502833)
11. Choi HJ, Lim MC, Bae J, et al. Region-based diagnostic performance of multidetector CT for detecting peritoneal seeding in ovarian cancer patients. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011;283:353-60.
12. Drieskens O, Stroobants S, Gysen M, Vandenbosch G, Mortelmans L, Vergote I. Positron emission tomography with FDG in the detection of peritoneal and retroperitoneal metastases of ovarian cancer. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2003;55:130-4. (Pubitemid 36928630)
13. Forstner R, Hricak H, Occhipinti KA, Powell CB, Frankel SD, Stern JL. Ovarian cancer: staging with CT and MR imaging. Radiology 1995;197:619-26.
14. Hauth EA, Antoch G, Stattaus J, et al. Evaluation of integrated whole-body PET/CT in the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur J Radiol 2005;56:263-8. (Pubitemid 41483027)
15. Kim CK, Park BK, Choi JY, Kim BG, Han H. Detection of recurrent ovarian cancer at MRI: comparison with integrated PET/CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007;31:868-75. (Pubitemid 350196929)
16. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDG-PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1439-48.
17. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in staging ovarian cancer: comparison with enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1912-20.
18. Mangili G, Picchio M, Sironi S, et al. Integrated PET/CT as a first-line re-staging modality in patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:658-66. (Pubitemid 46669366)
19. Meyer JI, Kennedy AW, Friedman R, Ayoub A, Zepp RC. Ovarian carcinoma: value of CT in predicting success of debulking surgery. Am J Roentgenol 1995;165:875-8.
20. Murakami M, Miyamoto T, Iida T, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography and tumor marker CA125 for detection of recurrence in epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16S1:99-107.
21. Nam EJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT, et al. Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI. Gynecol Oncol 2010;116:389-94.
22. Pannu HK, Cohade C, Bristow RE, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. PET-CT detection of abdominal recurrence of ovarian cancer: radiologic-surgical correlation. Abdom Imaging 2004;29:398-403. (Pubitemid 38590822)
23. Ricke J, Sehouli J, Hach C, Hänninen EL, Lichtenegger W, Felix R. Prospective evaluation of contrast-enhanced MRI in the depiction of peritoneal spread in primary or recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur Radiol 2003;13:943-9. (Pubitemid 36790585)
24. Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings. Radiology 2004;233:433-40. (Pubitemid 39423802)
25. Tempany CM, Zou KH, Silverman SG, Brown DL, Kurtz AB, McNeil BJ. Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities - report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 2000;215:761-7. (Pubitemid 30346013)
26. Thrall MM, DeLoia JA, Gallion H, Avril N. Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007;105:17-22. (Pubitemid 46441448)
27. Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kawahara K, et al. Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. Am J Roentgenol 2004;182:227-33. (Pubitemid 38017747)
28. Forstner R, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L, Frankel SB, Stern JL. Ovarian cancer recurrence: value of MR imaging. Radiology 1995;196:715-20.
29. Low RN, Duggan B, Barone RM, Saleh F, Song SY. Treated ovarian cancer: MR imaging, laparotomy reassessment, and serum CA-125 values compared with clinical outcome at 1 year. Radiology 2005;235:918-26. (Pubitemid 40695890)
30. Cook GJ, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Normal variants, artifacts and interpretative pitfalls in PET imaging with 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose and carbon-11 methionine. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26:1363-78. (Pubitemid 29467035)
31. Kostakoglu L, Agress Jr H, Goldsmith SJ. Clinical role of FDG PET in evaluation of cancer patients. Radiographics 2003;23:315-40. (Pubitemid 37431265)
32. Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1200-9. (Pubitemid 39655178)
33. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1369-79. (Pubitemid 30643379)
34. Grégoire G, Derderian F, Le Lorier J. Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: is there a Tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:159-63.
35. Nüesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, et al. Small study effects in meta-analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 2010;16:341.