OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of pre-contrast abdominal MR imaging for lesion detection and characterization in pediatric oncology patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 120 children (37 boys and 83 girls; mean age 8.94 years) referred by oncology services. Twenty-five had MRI for the first time and 95 were follow-up scans. Two authors independently reviewed pre-contrast MR images to note the following information about the lesions: location, number, solid vs. cystic and likely nature. Pre- and post-contrast imaging reviewed together served as the reference standard.
RESULTS: The overall sensitivity was 88% for the first reader and 90% for the second; specificity was 94% and 91%; positive predictive value was 96% and 94%; negative predictive value was 82% and 84%; accuracy of pre-contrast imaging for lesion detection as compared to the reference standard was 90% for both readers. The difference between mean number of lesions detected on pre-contrast imaging and reference standard was not significant for either reader (reader 1, P = 0.072; reader 2, P = 0.071). There was substantial agreement (kappa values of 0.76 and 0.72 for readers 1 and 2) between pre-contrast imaging and reference standard for determining solid vs. cystic lesion and likely nature of the lesion. The addition of post-contrast imaging increased confidence of both readers significantly (P
METHODS: 3317 raw digital mammograms were processed with Volpara(®) (Matakina Technology Ltd, Wellington, New Zealand) to obtain fibroglandular tissue volume (FGV), breast volume (BV) and VBD. Errors in parameters including CBT, kVp, filter thickness and mAs were simulated by varying them in the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) tags of the images up to ±10% of the original values. Errors in detector gain and offset were simulated by varying them in the Volpara configuration file up to ±10% from their default values. For image noise, Gaussian noise was generated and introduced into the original images.
RESULTS: Errors in filter thickness, mAs, detector gain and offset had limited effects on FGV, BV and VBD. Significant effects in VBD were observed when CBT, kVp, detector offset and image noise were varied (p
DESIGN: Studies on the association between CT values and smear status were included in a descriptive systematic review. Authors of studies including smear, culture and Xpert results were asked for individual-level data, and receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated.
RESULTS: Of 918 citations, 10 were included in the descriptive systematic review. Fifteen data sets from studies potentially relevant for individual-level data meta-analysis provided individual-level data (7511 samples from 4447 patients); 1212 patients had positive Xpert results for at least one respiratory sample (1859 samples overall). ROC analysis revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.85 (95%CI 0.82-0.87). Cut-off CT values of 27.7 and 31.8 yielded sensitivities of 85% (95%CI 83-87) and 95% (95%CI 94-96) and specificities of 67% (95%CI 66-77) and 35% (95%CI 30-41) for smear-positive samples.
CONCLUSION: Xpert CT values and smear status were strongly associated. However, diagnostic accuracy at set cut-off CT values of 27.7 or 31.8 would not replace smear microscopy. How CT values compare with smear microscopy in predicting infectiousness remains to be seen.