SynthesisAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Diagnostic performance of contrast enhancement to differentiate benign and malignant renal lesions in CT and MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies.
Synthesis in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic accuracy of iodine quantification and material density imaging with rapid Kilovoltage-switching DECT for small hyperattenuating renal lesions.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of contrast enhancement to differentiate benign and malignant renal lesions using CT and MRI. MATERIAL AND
methodsA systematic literature search of databases was performed between January 1, 1980 and September 26, 2022. We included studies reporting the accuracy of CE thresholds on CT and MRI indeterminate renal lesions, with pathologic examination and follow-up as the reference standard. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria underwent quality assessment with the Cochrane recommendation for diagnostic accuracy study Quality Assessment 2. We excluded studies with high risk of bias. Summary estimates of diagnostic performance were obtained with the bivariate Bayesian model for CT and MRI. Effects of different thresholds and index test modalities were investigated through subgroup analysis.
resultsEleven studies (1372 patients) using CT and six studies (218 patients) using MRI were included. Of the eleven studies, 15 parts from 9 studies were considered for the CT meta-analysis, and 6 parts from 3 studies for the MRI meta-analysis. Diagnostic performance meta-analysis on enhancement found a 96% summary sensitivity (95% CI 92, 98) and a 92% summary specificity (95% CI 85, 96) in 2056 renal lesions for CT; and 82% summary sensitivity (95% CI 65, 89) and an 89% summary specificity (95% CI 77, 95) in 634 lesions for MRI.
conclusionCT and MRI have high accuracy to determine enhancement and classify renal lesions, and both modalities can be used with confidence for this purpose. There are still some controversies about the optimal thresholds. Future research should evaluate outcomes and decision-making pathways to determine whether basing clinical decisions on a specific threshold on CT and MRI would do more harm than good.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39136719What 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.