SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022
The Diagnostic Performance of Maximum Uptake Value and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Ovarian or Adnexal Masses: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The added value of apparent diffusion coefficient assessments in O-RADS MRI evaluation for characterizing ovarian masses with solid components.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Clinical Potential and Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Advances in the Application of Radionuclide-Labeled HER2 Affibody for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Ovarian Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this meta-analysis was to provide evidence for using maximum uptake value (SUVmax) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) to quantitatively differentiate benign and malignant ovarian or adnexal masses, and to indirectly compare their diagnostic performance. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe association between SUVmax, ADC and ovarian or adnexal benign and malignant masses was searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until October 1, 2021. Two authors independently extracted the data. Studies included in the analysis were required to provide data for the construction of a 2 × 2 contingency table to evaluate the diagnostic performance of SUVmax or ADC in differentiating benign and malignant ovarian or adnexal masses. The quality of the enrolled studies was evaluated by Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) instrument, and the meta-analysis was conducted using Stata software version 14.0. Forest plots were generated according to the sensitivity and specificity of SUVmax and ADC, and meta-regression analysis was further used to assess heterogeneity between studies.
resultsA total of 14 studies were finally included in this meta-analysis by gradually excluding duplicate literatures, conference abstracts, guidelines, reviews, case reports, animal studies and so on. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of SUVmax for quantitative differentiation of benign and malignant ovarian or adnexal masses were 0.88 and 0.89, respectively, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity for ADC were 0.87 and 0.80, respectively.
conclusionQuantitative SUVmax and ADC values have good diagnostic performance in differentiating benign and malignant ovarian or adnexal masses, and SUVmax has higher accuracy than ADC. Future prospective studies with large sample sizes are needed for the analysis of the role of SUVmax and ADC in the differentiation of benign and malignant ovarian or adnexal masses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.