Standard b-value versus low b-value diffusion-weighted MRI in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

10Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: We sought to determine the comparative diagnostic performance of standard b-value (800-1000 s/mm2) versus low b-value (400-500 s/mm2) diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) in the detection of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Method: After a systematic review of the available literature, studies were included that reported b-values, used a histopathological reference standard, and allowed construction of 2 × 2 contingency tables for detection of RCC lesions using DW-MRI. In addition, a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) analysis was performed. Results: Four articles that complied with all inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for data extraction and analysis (n = 248 lesions in 266 patients). All four studies were high quality. Standard b-value DW-MRI displayed a pooled sensitivity of 0.59 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.67) and a pooled specificity of 0.50 (95% CI: 0.30-0.70), while low b-value DW-MRI displayed a pooled sensitivity of 0.58 (95% CI: 0.48-0.63) and a pooled specificity of 0.23 (95% CI: 0.09-0.44). The SROC curve of standard b-value DW-MRI displayed an AUC of 0.61 and a Q*index of 0.59, while the SROC curve of low b-value DW-MRI displayed an AUC of 0.68 and a Q*index of 0.64. Conclusion: Standard b-value DW-MRI showed a superior specificity but an approximately equivalent sensitivity to low b-value DW-MRI in detecting RCC lesions in the kidney. However, low b-value DW-MRI displayed an overall superior diagnostic accuracy over standard b-value DW-MRI.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tang, Y., Zhou, Y., Du, W., Liu, N., Zhang, C., Ouyang, T., & Hu, J. (2014). Standard b-value versus low b-value diffusion-weighted MRI in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-843

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free