Noncontrast MRI for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis - A Potential Surveillance Tool?
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This meta-analysis investigates the diagnostic performance of non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
METHODS: A systematic review was performed to May 2020 for studies which examined the diagnostic performance of non-contrast MRI (multi-sequence or diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI)- alone) for HCC detection in high risk patients. The primary outcome was accuracy for the detection of HCC. Random effects models were used to pool outcomes for sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR) and negative LR. Subgroup analyses for cirrhosis and size of the lesion were performed.
RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included involving 1685 patients for per-patient analysis and 2128 lesions for per-lesion analysis. Multi-sequence non-contrast MRI (NC-MRI) using T2+DWI±T1 sequences had a pooled per-patient sensitivity of 86.8% (95%CI:83.9-89.4%), specificity of 90.3% (95%CI:87.3-92.7%), and negative LR of 0.17 (95%CI:0.14-0.20). DWI-only MRI (DW-MRI) had a pooled sensitivity of 79.2% (95%CI:71.8-85.4%), specificity of 96.5% (95%CI:94.3-98.1%) and negative LR of 0.24 (95%CI:1.62-0.34). In patients with cirrhosis, NC-MRI had a pooled per-patient sensitivity of 87.3% (95%CI:82.7-91.0%) and specificity of 81.6% (95%CI:75.3-86.8%), whilst DWI-MRI had a pooled sensitivity of 71.4% (95%CI:60.5-80.8%) and specificity of 97.1% (95%CI:91.9-99.4%). For lesions 2 cm, pooled per-lesion sensitivity was 88.5%…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,685 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Learning from First-Generation Qualitative Approaches in the IS Discipline: An Evolutionary View and Some Implications for Authors and Evaluators (PART 1/2)
- Commentary on the clinical and preclinical dosage limits of interstitially administered magnetic fluids for therapeutic hyperthermia based on current practice and efficacy models
- Prosthesis: New Technological Opportunities and Innovative Biomedical Devices
- The history and future of neural modeling for cochlear implants
- Ryanodine receptors: waking up from refractoriness
- Novel Transgenic Rabbit Model Sheds Light on the Puzzling Role of Matrix Metalloproteinase-12 in Atherosclerosis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.