Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37083741›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2023

MRI vs. CT for pancreatic adenocarcinoma vascular invasion: comparative diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ankush Jajodia, Ashley Wang, Mostafa Alabousi, Christopher Wilks, Ameya Kulkarni, Christian B van der Pol

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. MRI for restaging pancreatic cancer.Insights into imaging · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Thin-slice TInsights into imaging · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ankush JajodiaDepartment of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada.
Ashley WangMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Mostafa AlabousiJoint Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Christopher WilksDepartment of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada.
Ameya KulkarniDepartment of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada.
Christian B van der PolDepartment of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada. vanderpolc@hhsc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1718-2619
Hamilton Health Sciences · CAJuravinski Hospital · CAMcMaster University · CAUniversity Health Network · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo perform a systematic review comparing the diagnostic accuracy of MRI vs. CT for assessing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) vascular invasion.

methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, and Scopus were searched until December 2021 for diagnostic accuracy studies comparing MRI vs. CT to evaluate vascular invasion of pathologically confirmed PDAC in the same patients. Findings on resection or exploratory laparotomy were the preferred reference standard. Data extraction, risk of bias, and applicability assessment were performed by two authors using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-Comparative Tool. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

resultsThree studies were included assessing 474 vessels without vascular invasion and 65 with vascular invasion in 107 patients. All patients were imaged using MRI at ≥ 1.5 T and a pancreatic protocol CT. No difference was shown between MRI and CT for diagnosing PDAC vascular invasion: MRI/CT sensitivity (95% CI) were 71% (47-87%)/74% (56-86%), and specificity were 97% (94-99%)/97% (94-98%). Sources of bias included selection bias from only a subset of CT patients undergoing MRI and verification bias from patients with unresectable disease not confirmed on surgery. No patients received neoadjuvant therapy prior to staging.

conclusionsBased on limited data, no difference was observed between MRI and pancreatic protocol CT for PDAC vascular invasion assessment. MRI may be an adequate substitute for pancreatic protocol CT in some patients, particularly those who have already had a single-phase CT. Larger and more recent cohort studies at low risk of bias, including patients who have received neoadjuvant therapy, are needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Abdominal MRI performed similarly to pancreatic protocol CT at assessing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma vascular invasion, suggesting local staging is adequate in some patients using MRI. More data are needed using larger, more recent cohorts including patients with neoadjuvant treatment. KEY POINTS: • Based on limited data, no difference was found between MRI and pancreatic protocol CT sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing PDAC vascular invasion (p = 0.81, 0.73 respectively). • Risk of bias could be reduced in future PDAC MRI vs CT comparative diagnostic test accuracy research by ensuring all enrolled patients undergo both imaging modalities being compared in random order and regardless of the findings on either modality. • More studies are needed that directly compare the diagnostic performance of MRI and CT for PDAC staging after neoadjuvant therapy.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalPancreatic NeoplasmsDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedCarcinoma, pancreatic ductalComparative studyMagnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysisMultidetector computed tomography

Identifiers

PMID37083741
OpenAlexW4366602082

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.