Distinguishing between benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion weighted imaging and intravoxel incoherent motion: A systematic review and meta-analysis
European Journal of Radiology, ISSN: 0720-048X, Vol: 141, Page: 109809
2021
- 15Citations
- 14Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations15
- Citation Indexes15
- 15
- CrossRef7
- Captures14
- Readers14
- 14
Article Description
We sought to evaluate the diagnostic performance of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) for distinguishing between benign and malignant breast tumors by performing a meta-analysis. We comprehensively searched the electronic databases PubMed and Embase from January 2000 to April 2020 for studies in English. Studies were included if they reported the sensitivity and specificity for identifying benign and malignant breast lesions using DWI or IVIM. Studies were reviewed according to QUADAS-2. The data inhomogeneity and publication bias were also assessed. In order to explore the influence of different field strengths and different b values on diagnostic efficiency, we conducted subgroup analysis. We analyzed 79 studies, which included a total of 6294 patients with 4091 malignant lesions and 2793 benign lesions. Overall, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of ADC for detecting malignant breast tumors were 0.87 (0.86–0.88) and 0.80 (0.78–0.81), respectively. The PLR was 5.09 (4.16–6.24); the NLR was 0.15 (0.13–0.18); and the DOR was 38.95 (28.87–52.54). The AUC value was 0.9297. The highest performing parameter for IVIM was tissue diffusivity (D), and the pooled sensitivity and specificity was 0.85 (0.82–0.88) and 0.87(0.83–0.90), respectively; the PLR was 5.65 (3.91–8.18); the NLR was 0.17 (0.12–0.26); and the DOR was 38.44 (23.57–62.69). The AUC value was 0.9265. Most of parameters demonstrated considerable statistically significant heterogeneity (P < 0.05, I 2 >50 %) except the pooled DOR, PLR of D and the pooled DOR and NLR of D*. Our meta-analysis indicated that DWI and IVIM had high sensitivity and specificity in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions; and compared with DWI, IVIM could not further increase the diagnostic performance. There was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X21002904; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109809; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85108173934&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34116452; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0720048X21002904; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109809
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know