Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23144927›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2012

Meta-analysis of gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of liver metastases.

Lihua Chen, Jiuquan Zhang, Lin Zhang, Jing Bao, Chen Liu, Yunbao Xia, Xuequan Huang, Jian Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation StudyMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Comparison ofCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024
    Article
  13. Liver metastases: The role of magnetic resonance imaging.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023
    Review
  14. Clinical Significance of Liver MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2023
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lihua ChenDepartment of Radiology, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Jiuquan Zhang
Lin Zhang
Jing Bao
Chen Liu
Yunbao Xia
Xuequan Huang
Jian Wang
Southwest Hospital · CNArmy Medical University · CNNantong University · CNWuxi Taihu Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the accuracy of MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA for the detection of liver metastases. MATERIALS AND

methodsPUBMED, EMBASE, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for original articles published prior to February 2012. The criteria for the inclusion of articles were as follows: reported in the English language; MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA was performed to detect liver metastases; histopathologic analysis (surgery, biopsy), intraoperative observation (manual palpatation, intraoperative ultrasonography), and/or follow-up US was the reference standard; and data were sufficient for the calculation of true-positive or false-negative values. The methodological quality was assessed by using the quality assessment of diagnostic studies instrument. The data were extracted to calculate sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, diagnostic odds ratio, and areas under hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curve to perform heterogeneity test and threshold effect test, as well as publication bias analysis and subgroup analyses.

resultsFrom 229 citations, 13 were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 1900 lesions. We detected heterogeneity between studies and evidence of publication bias. The methodological quality was moderate. The pooled weighted sensitivity with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90, 0. 95), the specificity was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.97), the positive likelihood ratio was 18.07 (95% CI: 10.52, 31.04), the negative likelihood ratio was 0.07 (95% CI: 0.05, 0.10), and the diagnostic odds ratio was 249.81 (95% CI: 125.12, 498.74). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.99).

conclusionMR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA is a reliable, non-invasive, and no-radiation-exposure imaging modality with a high sensitivity and specificity for detection of liver metastases. Nonetheless, it should be applied cautiously, and large scale, well-designed trials are necessary to assess its clinical value.

Indexed as

Gadolinium DTPAHumansLiverLiver NeoplasmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityGadolinium DTPAgadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA

Identifiers

PMID23144927
PMCPMC3492464
OpenAlexW2063823492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.