Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37342121›Full record

ReviewLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2023

The diagnostic utility of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and high-resolution computed tomography for cholesteatoma: A meta-analysis.

Mengzhao Xun, Xu Liu, Yongfang Sha, Xin Zhang, Jian Ping Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Article
  6. Acquired cholesteatoma.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Mengzhao XunENT Institute and Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Eye and ENT Hospital Fudan University Shanghai China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2122-4460
Xu LiuENT Institute and Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Eye and ENT Hospital Fudan University Shanghai China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5177-9948
Yongfang ShaENT Institute and Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Eye and ENT Hospital Fudan University Shanghai China.
Xin ZhangENT Institute and Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Eye and ENT Hospital Fudan University Shanghai China.
Jian Ping LiuENT Institute and Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Eye and ENT Hospital Fudan University Shanghai China.
Fudan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficiency of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) in guiding the diagnosis of middle ear cholesteatoma in clinical practice. Materials and methods: Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for studies that evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of HRCT or DWI in detecting middle ear cholesteatoma. A random-effects model was used to calculate and summarize the pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios. Postoperative pathological results were considered as the diagnostic gold standard for middle ear cholesteatoma. Results: Fourteen published articles (860 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The sensitivity and specificity of DWI when diagnosing cholesteatoma (regardless of type) were 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-0.93) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.86-0.97), respectively, while those of HRCT were 0.68 (95% CI, 0.57-0.77) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.60-0.90), respectively. Notably, the sensitivity and specificity levels of DWI were similar to those of HRCT ( Conclusion: DWI and HRCT have similar levels of high sensitivity and specificity in detecting various cholesteatomas. Also, the diagnostic efficiency of HRCT or DWI for recurrent cholesteatoma is identical to that of primary cholesteatoma. Therefore, HRCT may be used in clinical settings to reduce the use of DWI and save clinical resources. Lay summary: Data on the use of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and high-resolution computed tomography in the diagnosis of cholesteatoma were obtained through a literature search. They were analyzed to guide the clinical diagnosis and treatment of cholesteatoma. Level of evidence: NA.

Indexed as

cholesteatomacomputed tomographydiffusion‐weightedmagnetic resonance imagingmeta‐analysis

Identifiers

PMID37342121
PMCPMC10278117
OpenAlexW4362639827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.