A Systematic Review of MRI, Scintigraphy, FDG-PET and PET/CT for Diagnosis of @entity1582 Related XXXX - Which is Best?

@entity1582 @entity79 @entity1
AIM: The purpose of the current study was to conduct a systematic review of the published literature to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET, PTE/CT, MRI and scintigraphy for @entity1582 related @entity79 . METHODS: Through a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of each study. We estimated pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR), and two sample Z-tests were conducted to evaluate for differences in sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), and the Q* index between any two diagnostic modalities. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies were reviewed. The MRI had a pooled sensitivity of 0.88, specificity of 0.68, AUC of 0.897, and Q*index of 0.828, whereas for MIBI, the corresponding values were 0.98, 0.90, 0.991, and 0.962, respectively, and for bone scan, they were 066, 0.83, 0.805, and 0.740, respectively. The corresponding values of MIBI were 0.98, 0.90, 0.991, and 0.962, respectively. For PET and PET/CT, the values were 0.91, 0.69, 0.927 and 0.861, respectively. Statistically significant differences were not found in the sensitivity, specificity, AUC, and Q* index between MRI, scintigraphy, FDG-PET and PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: On the condition that X ray is taken as a reference in our study, we suggested that FDG-PET, PTE/CT, MRI and scintigraphy are all associated with high detection rate of @entity79 in @entity1 with MM. Thus, in clinical practice, it is recommended that we could choose these tests according to the condition of the @entity1 .
