Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32869506›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2020

Accuracy of transvaginal sonoelastography for differential diagnosis between malignant and benign cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yi Zhu, Xue-Feng Leng, Guo-Nan Zhang, Zi-Yi Huang, Li Qiu, Wei Huang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yi ZhuDepartment of Ultrasound, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8783-319X
Xue-Feng LengDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chengdu, China.
Guo-Nan ZhangDepartment of Gynecological Oncology, the Affiliated Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Sichuan Cancer Hospital and Institute, Chengdu, China.
Zi-Yi HuangDepartment of Bioinformatics, Basic Medical College of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Li QiuDepartment of Ultrasound, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Wei HuangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNSichuan University · CNChongqing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the performance of transvaginal sonoelastography (TVSE) for differential diagnosis between malignant and benign cervical lesions using a meta-analysis.

methodsAn independent literature search was conducted on the English medical database, including PubMed, Embase and Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and OVID. The diagnostic accuracy of TVSE was compared with that of histopathology, which is the gold reference standard for diagnosis. The accuracy of TVSE was assessed by calculating the pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the curve (AUC). The imaging mechanisms, assessment methods, and QUADAS scores were assessed with a meta-regression analysis. A Deeks funnel plot was performed for evaluating publication bias.

resultsSix eligible studies reported a total sample of 615 cervical lesions (415 cancers, 200 benign lesions). TVSE showed a pooled diagnostic odds ratio of 21.42 (95% CI 13.65-33.61), sensitivity of 0.87 (95% CI 0.84-0.90), specificity of 0.79 (95% CI 0.72-0.84), and an AUC of 0.892 (Q* = 0.822). The results of the meta-regression analysis showed that the imaging mechanism (P = .253), the assessment method (P = .279), or QUADAS score (P = .205) did not affect the study heterogeneity.

conclusionTVSE has a relatively high and satisfactory value for differential diagnosis between malignant and benign cervical lesions. The diagnostic performance of strain elastography and shear wave elastography were similar and good. However, to accommodate heterogeneity and publication bias, high-quality studies are required to further comparative effectiveness analyses to verify the efficacy of ultrasound detection.

Indexed as

Elasticity Imaging TechniquesDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsUterine Cervical DiseasesUterine Cervical Neoplasmscervical neoplasmselasticity imaging techniquesultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID32869506
PMCPMC7643678
OpenAlexW3082028266

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.