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

2022
journal article
article
dc.abstract.enPurpose: 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.pl
dc.contributor.authorVirarkar, Mayurpl
dc.contributor.authorSzklaruk, Janiopl
dc.contributor.authorDiab, Radwanpl
dc.contributor.authorBassett, Jr., Rolandpl
dc.contributor.authorBhosale, Priyapl
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-22T08:23:06Z
dc.date.available2022-08-22T08:23:06Z
dc.date.issued2022pl
dc.date.openaccess0
dc.description.accesstimew momencie opublikowania
dc.description.additionalBibliogr. s. e428-e429pl
dc.description.physicale421-e429pl
dc.description.versionostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.description.volume87pl
dc.identifier.doi10.5114/pjr.2022.118685pl
dc.identifier.eissn1899-0967pl
dc.identifier.issn1733-134Xpl
dc.identifier.urihttps://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/298352
dc.languageengpl
dc.language.containerengpl
dc.rightsUdzielam licencji. Uznanie autorstwa - Użycie niekomercyjne - Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowa*
dc.rights.licenceCC-BY-NC-ND
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.pl*
dc.share.typeotwarte czasopismo
dc.subject.en1.5 Tpl
dc.subject.en3.0 Tpl
dc.subject.enprostate cancerpl
dc.subject.enmeta-analysispl
dc.subtypeArticlepl
dc.titleDiagnostic value of 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MRI in staging prostate cancer : systematic review and meta-analysispl
dc.title.journalPolish Journal of Radiologypl
dc.typeJournalArticlepl
dspace.entity.typePublication
dc.abstract.enpl
Purpose: 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.
dc.contributor.authorpl
Virarkar, Mayur
dc.contributor.authorpl
Szklaruk, Janio
dc.contributor.authorpl
Diab, Radwan
dc.contributor.authorpl
Bassett, Jr., Roland
dc.contributor.authorpl
Bhosale, Priya
dc.date.accessioned
2022-08-22T08:23:06Z
dc.date.available
2022-08-22T08:23:06Z
dc.date.issuedpl
2022
dc.date.openaccess
0
dc.description.accesstime
w momencie opublikowania
dc.description.additionalpl
Bibliogr. s. e428-e429
dc.description.physicalpl
e421-e429
dc.description.version
ostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.description.volumepl
87
dc.identifier.doipl
10.5114/pjr.2022.118685
dc.identifier.eissnpl
1899-0967
dc.identifier.issnpl
1733-134X
dc.identifier.uri
https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/298352
dc.languagepl
eng
dc.language.containerpl
eng
dc.rights*
Udzielam licencji. Uznanie autorstwa - Użycie niekomercyjne - Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowa
dc.rights.licence
CC-BY-NC-ND
dc.rights.uri*
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.pl
dc.share.type
otwarte czasopismo
dc.subject.enpl
1.5 T
dc.subject.enpl
3.0 T
dc.subject.enpl
prostate cancer
dc.subject.enpl
meta-analysis
dc.subtypepl
Article
dc.titlepl
Diagnostic value of 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MRI in staging prostate cancer : systematic review and meta-analysis
dc.title.journalpl
Polish Journal of Radiology
dc.typepl
JournalArticle
dspace.entity.type
Publication
Affiliations

* The migration of download and view statistics prior to the date of April 8, 2024 is in progress.

Views
2
Views per month
Views per city
San Jose
1
Downloads
virarkar_szklaruk_diab_bassett_bhosale_diagnostic_value_of_3-0_t_versus_1-5_t_mri_2022.pdf
2
virarkar_szklaruk_diab_bassett_bhosale_diagnostic_value_of_3-0_t_versus_1-5_t_mri_2022.odt
1