Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26559290›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2015

Diagnostic Performance of Diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Bone Malignancy: Evidence From a Meta-Analysis.

Li-Peng Liu, Long-Biao Cui, Xin-Xin Zhang, Jing Cao, Ning Chang, Xing Tang, Shun Qi, Xiao-Liang Zhang, Hong Yin, Jian Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Recent Advances in Musculoskeletal Radiology: Bridging Innovation and Clinical Application.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Multimodal surface coils for low field MR imaging.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2024
    Article
  8. Coupled stack-up volume RF coils for low-field open MR imaging.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Dual-Tuned Coaxial-Transmission-Line RF Coils for HyperpolarizedIEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Li-Peng LiuFrom the Department of Respiratory Medicine (L-PL, X-XZ, JC, NC, JZ); Department of Radiology, Xijing Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China (L-BC, XT, SQ, HY); and Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco, California (X-LZ).
Long-Biao Cui
Xin-Xin Zhang
Jing Cao
Ning Chang
Xing Tang
Shun Qi
Xiao-Liang Zhang
Hong Yin
Jian Zhang
X-Fab (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current state-of-the-art nuclear medicine imaging methods (such as PET/CT or bone scintigraphy) may have insufficient sensitivity for predicting bone tumor, and substantial exposure to ionizing radiation is associated with the risk of secondary cancer development. Diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) is radiation free and requires no intravenous contrast media, and hence is more suitable for population groups that are vulnerable to ionizing radiation and/or impaired renal functions. This meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether whole-body DW-MRI is a viable means in differentiating bone malignancy. Medline and Embase databases were searched from their inception to May 2015 without language restriction for studies evaluating DW-MRI for detection of bone lesions. Methodological quality was assessed by the quality assessment of diagnostic studies (QUADAS-2) instrument. Sensitivities, specificities, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and areas under the curve (AUC) were used as measures of the diagnostic accuracy. We combined the effects by using the random-effects mode. Potential threshold effects and publication bias were investigated. We included data from 32 studies with 1507 patients. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-0.97), 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.95), and 0.98 on a per-patient basis, and they were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.87-0.94), 0.94 (95% CI, 0.90-0.96), and 0.97 on a per-lesion basis. In subgroup analysis, there is no statistical significance found in the sensitivity and specificity of using DWI only and DWI combined with other morphological or functional imaging sequence in both basis (P > 0.05). A b value of 750 to 1000 s/mm enables higher AUC and DOR for whole-body imaging purpose when compared with other values in both basis either (P < 0.01). The ROC space did not show a curvilinear trend of points and a threshold effect was not observed. According to the Deek's plots, there was no publication bias on both basis. Our results support the use of DWI as an effective means for distinguishing malignant bone lesions; however, various imaging parameters need to be standardized prior to its broad use in clinical practice.

Indexed as

AnimalsBone NeoplasmsDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingHumansRabbitsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID26559290
PMCPMC4912284
OpenAlexW2334788155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.