Accuracy of 18F‑FDG PET/CT and CECT for primary staging and diagnosis of recurrent gastric cancer: A meta‑analysis
- Zhicheng Zhang
- Bo Zheng
- Wei Chen
- Hui Xiong
- Caiming Jiang
Affiliations: Department of Radiology, The Ninth People's Hospital of Chongqing, Chongqing 400700, P.R. China
- Published online on: December 21, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9595
Copyright: © Zhang
et al. This is an open access article distributed under the
terms of Creative
Commons Attribution License.
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
This article is mentioned in:
Contrast‑enhanced computed tomography (CECT) is commonly used for staging and diagnosing recurrent gastric cancer. Recently, 18F‑fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F‑FDG PET)/CT gained popularity as a diagnostic tool owing to advantages including dual functional and anatomical imaging, which may facilitate early diagnosis. The diagnostic performance of 18F‑FDG PET/CT and CECT has been assessed in several studies but with variable results. Therefore, the present meta‑analysis aimed to evaluate the accuracy of 18F‑FDG PET/CT and CECT for primary TNM staging and the diagnosis of recurrent gastric cancers. A systematic search of the PubMed Central, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane and Embase databases from inception until January 2020 was performed. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Study‑2 tool was used to determine the quality of the selected studies. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated. A total of 58 studies comprising 9,997 patients were included. Most studies had a low risk of bias. The sensitivity and specificity for nodal staging of gastric cancer were 49% (95% CI, 37‑61%) and 92% (95% CI, 86‑96%) for 18F‑FDG PET/CT, respectively, and 67% (95% CI, 57‑76%) and 86% (95% CI, 81‑89%) for CECT, respectively. For metastasis staging, the sensitivity and specificity were 56% (95% CI, 40‑71%) and 97% (95% CI, 87‑99%) for 18F‑FDG PET/CT, respectively, and 59% (95% CI, 41‑75%) and 96% (95% CI, 83‑99%) for CECT, respectively. For diagnosing cancer recurrence, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 81% (95% CI, 72‑88%) and 83% (95% CI, 74‑89%) for 18F‑FDG PET/CT, respectively, and 59% (95% CI, 41‑75%) and 96% (95% CI, 83‑99%) for CECT, respectively. Both 18F‑FDG PET/CT and CECT were deemed highly useful for diagnosing recurrent gastric cancer due to their high sensitivities and specificities. However, these techniques cannot be used to exclude or confirm the presence of lymph node metastases or recurrent gastric cancer tumors, but can be used for the confirmation of distal metastasis.