ISSN: 1899-0967
Polish Journal of Radiology
Established by prof. Zygmunt Grudziński in 1926 Sun
Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Contact Instructions for authors Ethical standards and procedures
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
 
1/2022
vol. 87
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
Urogenital radiology
abstract:
Original paper

Diagnostic value of 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MRI in staging prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

Mayur Virarkar
1
,
Janio Szklaruk
2
,
Radwan Diab
2
,
Roland Bassett, Jr.
2
,
Priya Bhosale
2

1.
Department of Radiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida 32209, USA
2.
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
© Pol J Radiol 2022; 87: e421-e429
Online publish date: 2022/07/29
View full text
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 
Introduction
To compare the diagnostic performance of 3.0 T and 1.5 T MRI in the staging of prostate cancer.

Material and methods
English-language studies on the diagnostic accuracy of 3.0 T and 1.5 T MRI in prostate cancer staging published through May 2020 were searched for in relevant databases. The focus was on studies in which both 3.0 T and 1.5 T MRI were performed in the study population, to reduce interstudy heterogeneity. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were determined for 3.0 T and for 1.5 T along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results
Out of 8 studies identified, 4 met the inclusion criteria. 3.0 T (n = 160) had a pooled sensitivity of 69.5% (95% CI: 56.4-80.1%) and a pooled specificity of 48.8% (95% CI: 6.0-93.4%), while 1.5 T (n = 139) had a pooled sensitivity of 70.6% (95% CI: 55.0-82.5%; p = 0.91) and a pooled specificity of 41.7% (95% CI: 6.2-88.6%; p = 0.88). The pooled DOR for 3.0 T was 3 (95% CI: 0-26.0%), while the pooled DOR for 1.5 T was 2 (95% CI: 0-18.0%), which was not a significant difference (p = 0.89).

Conclusions
3.0 T has slightly better diagnostic performance than 1.5 T MRI in prostate cancer staging (3 vs. 2), although without statistical significance. Our findings suggest the need for larger, randomized trials directly comparing 3.0 T and 1.5 T MRI in prostate cancer.

keywords:

15 T, 30 T, prostate cancer, meta-analysis




Quick links
© 2022 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.