Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28816957›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

Value and impact factors of multidetector computed tomography in diagnosis of preoperative lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mingxu Luo, You Lv, Xiuyu Guo, Hongmei Song, Guoqiang Su, Bo Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. BRAZILIAN GASTRIC CANCER ASSOCIATION GUIDELINES (PART 1): AN UPDATE ON DIAGNOSIS, STAGING, ENDOSCOPIC TREATMENT AND FOLLOW-UP.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2020
    Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mingxu LuoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Xiamen Cancer Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian Department of Radiology, Xiamen Cancer Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian Department of Oncology, Renmin Hospital of Shiyan, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan, Hubei, China.
You Lv
Xiuyu Guo
Hongmei Song
Guoqiang Su
Bo Chen
First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultidetector computed tomography (MDCT) exhibited wide ranges of sensitivities and specificities for lymph node assessment of gastric cancer (GC) in several individual studies. This present meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate the value of MDCT in diagnosis of preoperative lymph node metastasis (LNM) and to explore the impact factors that might explain the heterogeneity of its diagnostic accuracy in GC.

methodsA comprehensive search was conducted to collect all the relevant studies about the value of MDCT in assessing LNM of GC within the PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase databases up to Feb 2, 2016. Two investigators independently screened the studies, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of included studies. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under ROC curve (AUC) were pooled to estimate the overall accuracy of MDCT. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were carried out to identify the possible factors influencing the heterogeneity of the accuracy.

resultsA total of 27 studies with 6519 subjects were finally included. Overall, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.56-0.77), 0.86 (95% CI: 0.81-0.90), and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89), respectively. Meta-regression revealed that MDCT section thickness, proportion of serosal invasion, and publication year were the main significant impact factors in sensitivity, and MDCT section thickness, multiplanar reformation (MPR), and reference standard were the main significant impact factors in specificity. After the included studies were divided into 2 groups (Group A: studies with proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects ≥50%; Group B: studies with proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects <50%), the pooled sensitivity in Group A was significantly higher than in Group B (0.84 [95% CI: 0.75-0.90] vs 0.55 [95% CI: 0.41-0.68], P < .01). For early gastric cancer (EGC), the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15-0.61), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.95), and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86), respectively.

conclusionTo summarize, MDCT tends to be adequate to assess preoperative LNM in serosa-invasive GC, but insufficient for non-serosa-invasive GC (particularly for EGC) owing to its low sensitivity. Proportion of serosa-invasive GC subjects, MDCT section thickness, MPR, and reference standard are the main factors influencing its diagnostic accuracy.

Indexed as

HumansLymphatic MetastasisMultidetector Computed TomographyPreoperative PeriodSensitivity and SpecificityStomach Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID28816957
PMCPMC5571694
OpenAlexW2748047561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-SA
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.