ArticleTranslational cancer research2022
Diagnostic value of double low-dose targeted perfusion CT imaging for the diagnosis of invasive and preinvasive pulmonary ground-glass nodules: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting EGFR gene mutation in lung adenocarcinoma using spectral CT combined with AI parameters: a diagnostic accuracy study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Deep learning-assisted development and validation of an algorithm for predicting the growth of persistent pure ground-glass nodules.Translational lung cancer research · 2023Article
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
Background: This study aimed to systematically evaluate and compare the diagnostic value of bubble lucency, interface, lobulated margin and spiculation in distinguishing early invasive and preinvasive intrapulmonary ground-glass nodules (GGNs) using evidence-based meta-analysis methods. Dual low-dose targeted perfusion computed tomography (CT) imaging is controversial in the diagnosis of invasive and preinvasive ground-glass nodules. Different studies have different views and opinions. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a systematic review of this subject in the form of meta-analysis to guide clinical diagnosis and treatment. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Embase were searched for recent documentation on the diagnostic value of different signs in invasive and preinvasive pulmonary GGNs. CT imaging signs of bubble lucency, speculation, interface, lobulated margin, and spiculation were used as diagnostic references to discriminate pre-invasive and invasive disease. The sensitivity, specificity, summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves, and the area under the SROC curve (AUC) were calculated to evaluate diagnostic efficiency. Results: The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity using bubble lucency as a reference of invasive ground-glass opacity (GGO) discrimination was 0.33 (0.24-0.44) and 0.74 (0.62-0.83) respectively. For interface, lobulated margin, and speculation, the diagnostic sensitivity were 0.30 (0.21-0.41), 0.49 (0.39-0.60) and 0.22 (0.14-0.33); and the specificity were 0.83 (0.74-0.89), 0.66 (0.49-0.80) and 0.86 (0.67-0.95). The pooled ROC curve was drawn by sensitivity against 1-specificity using Stata version 15.0. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) values were 0.53, 0.60, 0.58, and 0.43 for bubble lucency, speculation, lobulated margin, and pleural indentation of GGO for discriminating pre-invasive and invasive disease. Conclusions: The diagnostic value of a single CT imaging sign of GGO, such as bubble lucency, speculation, interface, lobulated margin, and spiculation is limited for discriminating pre-invasive and invasive disease because of low sensitivity, specificity, and AUC.
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.