Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Reliability of intraoperative ultrasound in detecting tumor residual after brain diffuse glioma surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Trevisi, Gianluca; Barbone, Paolo; Treglia, Giorgio; Mattoli, Maria Vittoria; Mangiola, Annunziato.
Afiliação
  • Trevisi G; Neurosurgical Unit, Presidio Ospedaliero Santo Spirito, Via Fonte Romana, 8, 65124, Pescara, Italy. trevisi.gianluca@gmail.com.
  • Barbone P; Neurosurgical Unit, Presidio Ospedaliero Santo Spirito, Via Fonte Romana, 8, 65124, Pescara, Italy.
  • Treglia G; Health Technology Assessment Unit, General Directorate, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland.
  • Mattoli MV; Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona and Lugano, Lugano, Switzerland.
  • Mangiola A; Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Hospital of Lausanne and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Neurosurg Rev ; 43(5): 1221-1233, 2020 Oct.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31410683
ABSTRACT
Intraoperative ultrasonography (iUS) is considered an accurate, safe, and cost-effective tool to estimate the extent of resection of both high-grade (HGG) and low-grade (DLGG) diffuse gliomas (DGs). However, it is currently missing an evidence-based assessment of iUS diagnostic accuracy in DGs surgery. The objective of review is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of iUS in detecting tumor residue after DGs resection. A comprehensive literature search for studies published through October 2018 was performed according to PRISMA-DTA and STARD 2015 guidelines, using the following algorithm ("ultrasound" OR "ultrasonography" OR "ultra-so*" OR "echo*" OR "eco*") AND ("brain" OR "nervous") AND ("tumor" OR "tumour" OR "lesion" OR "mass" OR "glio*" OR "GBM") AND ("surgery" OR "surgical" OR "microsurg*" OR "neurosurg*"). Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of iUS in DGs were calculated. A subgroup analysis for HGGs and DLGGs was also conducted. Thirteen studies were included in the systematic review (665 DGs). Ten articles (409 DGs) were selected for the meta-analysis with the following

results:

sensitivity 72.2%, specificity 93.5%, LR- 0.29, LR+ 3, and DOR 9.67. Heterogeneity among studies was non-significant. Subgroup analysis demonstrates a better diagnostic performance of iUS for DLGGs compared with HGGs. iUS is an effective technique in assessing DGs resection. No significant differences are seen regarding iUS modality and transducer characteristics. Its diagnostic performance is higher in DLGGs than HGGs and could be worsened by previous treatments, surgical artifacts, and small tumor residue volumes.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Encefálicas / Ultrassonografia / Glioma / Período Intraoperatório Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Neurosurg Rev Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Encefálicas / Ultrassonografia / Glioma / Período Intraoperatório Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Neurosurg Rev Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália