Imaging in Suspected Renal-Cell Carcinoma: Systematic Review

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00669806%3A_____%2F19%3A10395074" target="_blank" >RIV/00669806:_____/19:10395074 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/00216208:11140/19:10395074

Result on the web

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=viviZ5xgC" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=viviZ5xgC</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2018.07.024" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.clgc.2018.07.024</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Imaging in Suspected Renal-Cell Carcinoma: Systematic Review

Original language description

Diagnosis in renal masses is often based on incidental findings by ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Imaging modalities to assess the diagnosis or stage of renal tumors were analyzed via a systematic review. The diagnosis of a renal mass should be based on contrast-enhanced CT or MRI with the recommendation to use contrast-enhanced US for further differentiation in unclear renal masses. Objective: To systematically assessed the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) compared to other imaging modalities for diagnosing and staging renal-cell carcinoma in adults. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted through various electronic databases. Data from the selected studies were extracted and pooled, and median sensitivity and specificity were calculated wherever possible. Forty studies analyzing data of 4354 patients were included. They examined CT, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography-CT, and ultrasound (US). Results: For CT, median sensitivity and specificity were 88% (interquartile range [IQR] 81%-94%) and 75% (IQR 51%-90%), and for MRI they were 87.5% (IQR 75.25%-100%) and 89% (IQR 75%-96%). Staging sensitivity and specificity for CT were 87% and 74.5%, while MRI showed a median sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 75%. For US, the results varied greatly depending on the corresponding technique. Contrast-enhanced US had a median diagnostic sensitivity of 93% (IQR 88.75%-98.25%) combined with mediocre specificity. The diagnostic performance of unenhanced US was poor. For positron emission tomography-CT, diagnostic accuracy values were good but were based on only a small amount of data. Limitations include the strong heterogeneity of data due to the large variety in imaging techniques and tumor histotypes. Contrast-enhanced CT and MRI remain the diagnostic mainstay for renal-cell carcinoma, with almost equally high diagnostic and staging accuracy. Conclusion: For specific questions, a combination of different imaging techniques such as CT or MRI and contrast-enhanced US may be useful. There is a need for future large prospective studies to further increase the quality of evidence. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30204 - Oncology

Project

—

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2019

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Clinical Genitourinary Cancer

ISSN

1558-7673

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

17

Issue of the periodical within the volume

2

Country of publishing house

US - UNITED STATES

Number of pages

11

Pages from-to

"E345"-"E355"

UT code for WoS article

000464949500013

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85057609879