Premium
18 F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to evaluate recurrent gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Author(s) -
Wu LianMing,
Hu JiaNi,
Hua Jia,
Gu HaiYan,
Zhu Jiong,
Xu JianRong
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
journal of gastroenterology and hepatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.214
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1440-1746
pISSN - 0815-9319
DOI - 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06919.x
Subject(s) - medicine , confidence interval , positron emission tomography , meta analysis , nuclear medicine , cochrane library , diagnostic accuracy , cancer , receiver operating characteristic , fluorodeoxyglucose
Background and Aim: We aimed to explore the role of the diagnostic accuracy of 18 F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ( 18 F‐FDG PET) in detecting recurrent gastric cancer through a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cancerlit, and Cochrane Library database, from January 2001 to July 2011, were searched for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of 18 F‐FDG PET in detecting recurrent gastric cancer. We determined the sensitivities and specificities across studies, calculated positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR−), and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves. We also compared the performance of 18 F‐FDG PET with computed tomography (CT) by analyzing studies that had also used these diagnostic methods on the same patients. Results: Across nine studies (526 patients), the overall sensitivity of 18 F‐FDG PET was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68–0.86), and the overall specificity was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.76–0.87). Overall, LR+ was 3.52 (95% CI: 2.68–4.63) and LR− was 0.32 (95% CI: 0.22–0.46). In studies in which both 18 F‐FDG PET and other diagnostic tests were performed, the sensitivity and specificity of 18 F‐FDG PET were 0.72 (95% CI: 0.62–0.80) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.77–0.90), respectively; of contrast CT, they were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.64–0.83) and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.78–0.90), respectively; and of combined PET and CT, they were 0.75 (95% CI: 0.67–0.82) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.79–0.90), respectively. Study sensitivity was not correlated with the prevalence of recurrent gastric cancer. Conclusion: 18 F‐FDG PET has good diagnostic performance in the overall evaluation of recurrent gastric cancer, but still has some limited performance compared with contrast CT. 18 F‐FDG PET combined with CT might improve the diagnostic performance in detecting recurrent gastric cancer.