2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4708-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contrast-enhanced CT in determining resectability in patients with pancreatic carcinoma: a meta-analysis of the positive predictive values of CT

Abstract: ObjectiveTo obtain a summary positive predictive value (sPPV) of contrast-enhanced CT in determining resectability.MethodsThe MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from JAN2005 to DEC2015 were searched and checked for inclusion criteria. Data on study design, patient characteristics, imaging techniques, image evaluation, reference standard, time interval between CT and reference standard, and data on resectability/unresectablity were extracted by two reviewers. We used a fixed-effects or random-effects approach to obta… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
1
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The third and main limitation of multidetector CT for initial PDA staging is inadequate sensitivity for detecting small liver metastases (55,56). For achieving this goal, MR imaging performs better than does multidetector CT.…”
Section: Limitations Of Imaging Studies For Initial Stagingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The third and main limitation of multidetector CT for initial PDA staging is inadequate sensitivity for detecting small liver metastases (55,56). For achieving this goal, MR imaging performs better than does multidetector CT.…”
Section: Limitations Of Imaging Studies For Initial Stagingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients are falsely determined to have resectable disease mostly because of missed distant metastases rather than underestimated major vascular invasion . Missed distant metastasis can be mainly attributed to metastatic lesions that are too small to be detected by any currently available imaging modalities including CT.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients are falsely determined to have resectable disease mostly because of missed distant metastases rather than underestimated major vascular invasion. 7 Missed distant metastasis can be mainly attributed to metastatic lesions that are too small to be detected by any currently available imaging modalities including CT. However, as the presence or absence of distant metastasis is likely to be associated with factors related to tumor burden such as primary tumor extent or serum tumor marker level, we hypothesized that we may preoperatively predict the presence of radiologically undetectable metastasis with a model incorporating various radiologic and clinical factors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the various criteria for imaging-based resectability assessment of pancreatic cancer (12)(13)(14), those proposed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) (11) are the most widely used and serve to classify pancreatic cancer as resectable, borderline resectable, or unresectable. Although CT is widely used in this respect, the possibility of R0 resection according to CT resectability status is poorly understood, since most previous evaluations focused on prediction of surgical resectability without considering pathologic resection margin status (15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21). Surgical resections in these studies were mostly limited to standard pancreatic resection and excluded tumors that required extended pancreatectomy.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%