Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31887730›Full record

SynthesisMedical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre2020

Meta-Analysis of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Primary Bone and Soft Tissue Sarcomas by 18F-FDG-PET.

Manaf H Younis, Hasan A Abu-Hijleh, Osama O Aldahamsheh, Abdulrahman Abualruz, Lukman Thalib

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Advances inWorld journal of radiology · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Manaf H YounisDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Jackson Memorial Hospital, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.
Hasan A Abu-HijlehDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Hamad General Hospital, Doha, Qatar.
Osama O AldahamshehDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Hamad General Hospital, Doha, Qatar.
Abdulrahman AbualruzDepartment of Radiology, Wake Forest Baptist Hospital, Winston- Salem, North Carolina, USA.
Lukman ThalibDepartment of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar, Lthalib@qu.edu.qa.
Hamad General Hospital · QAQatar University · QAAtrium Health Wake Forest Baptist · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe goal of this meta-analysis was to assess the use of FDG-PET in the diagnosis of primary bone and soft tissue sarcomas. SUBJECTS AND

methodsSeveral databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, were searched. In addition to sensitivity and specificity, the diagnostic accuracy region for detecting and grading sarcomas were pooled using bivariate and hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic (HSROC) models. Subgroup analysis included pooling soft tissue and bone sarcomas separately, and sensitivity analysis included high-quality studies. The quality of eligible studies was assessed using QUADAS-2.

resultsOf the 1,258 papers screened, 21 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET combined with CT for the detection of sarcomas were 89.2 and 76.3%, respectively. These diagnostic accuracy measures were higher when combined with CT than those of PDG-PET alone. Diagnostic accuracy for bone and soft tissue lesions were comparable but slightly better for soft tissue tumors. Pooling only the high-quality studies with low risk of bias yielded a sensitivity of 88.5% and specificity reduced to 65.6%. There was no evidence for publication bias, but significant heterogeneity among the studies was apparent. This study also showed that FDG-PET can efficiently differentiate between benign and malignant tumors, with a mean standard uptake value of maximally 2.52 units in benign and 6.81 units in malignant tumors (89.2% sensitivity and 75.1% specificity).

conclusionOur findings indicate FDG-PET can efficiently differentiate between benign and malignant bone and soft tissue tumors. We also found that FDG-PET improves accuracy in diagnosing soft tissue sarcomas when combined with CT.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansMultimodal ImagingPositron-Emission TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsROC CurveSarcomaSensitivity and SpecificitySoft Tissue NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedFluorodeoxyglucose F18RadiopharmaceuticalsMeta-AnalysisPETPositron emission tomographySarcoma

Identifiers

PMID31887730
PMCPMC7511687
OpenAlexW2998132351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.