-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2018Approximately 0.6% to 4% of cholecystectomies are performed because of gallbladder polyps. The decision to perform cholecystectomy is based on presence of gallbladder... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Approximately 0.6% to 4% of cholecystectomies are performed because of gallbladder polyps. The decision to perform cholecystectomy is based on presence of gallbladder polyp(s) on transabdominal ultrasound (TAUS) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), or both. These polyps are currently considered for surgery if they grow more than 1 cm. However, non-neoplastic polyps (pseudo polyps) do not need surgery, even when they are larger than 1 cm. True polyps are neoplastic, either benign (adenomas) or (pre)malignant (dysplastic polyps/carcinomas). True polyps need surgery, especially if they are premalignant or malignant. There has been no systematic review and meta-analysis on the accuracy of TAUS and EUS in the diagnosis of gallbladder polyps, true gallbladder polyps, and (pre)malignant polyps.
OBJECTIVES
To summarise and compare the accuracy of transabdominal ultrasound (TAUS) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for the detection of gallbladder polyps, for differentiating between true and pseudo gallbladder polyps, and for differentiating between dysplastic polyps/carcinomas and adenomas/pseudo polyps of the gallbladder in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and trial registrations (last date of search 09 July 2018). We had no restrictions regarding language, publication status, or prospective or retrospective nature of the studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies reporting on the diagnostic accuracy data (true positive, false positive, false negative and true negative) of the index test (TAUS or EUS or both) for detection of gallbladder polyps, differentiation between true and pseudo polyps, or differentiation between dysplastic polyps/carcinomas and adenomas/pseudo polyps. We only accepted histopathology after cholecystectomy as the reference standard, except for studies on diagnosis of gallbladder polyp. For the latter studies, we also accepted repeated imaging up to six months by TAUS or EUS as the reference standard.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently screened abstracts, selected studies for inclusion, and collected data from each study. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool. The bivariate random-effects model was used to obtain summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity, to compare diagnostic performance of the index tests, and to assess heterogeneity.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 16 studies were included. All studies reported on TAUS and EUS as separate tests and not as a combination of tests. All studies were at high or unclear risk of bias, ten studies had high applicability concerns in participant selection (because of inappropriate participant exclusions) or reference standards (because of lack of follow-up for non-operated polyps), and three studies had unclear applicability concerns in participant selection (because of high prevalence of gallbladder polyps) or index tests (because of lack of details on ultrasound equipment and performance). A meta-analysis directly comparing results of TAUS and EUS in the same population could not be performed because only limited studies executed both tests in the same participants. Therefore, the results below were obtained only from indirect test comparisons. There was significant heterogeneity amongst all comparisons (target conditions) on TAUS and amongst studies on EUS for differentiating true and pseudo polyps.Detection of gallbladder polyps: Six studies (16,260 participants) used TAUS. We found no studies on EUS. The summary sensitivity and specificity of TAUS for the detection of gallbladder polyps was 0.84 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.95) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.98), respectively. In a cohort of 1000 people, with a 6.4% prevalence of gallbladder polyps, this would result in 37 overdiagnosed and seven missed gallbladder polyps.Differentiation between true polyp and pseudo gallbladder polyp: Six studies (1078 participants) used TAUS; the summary sensitivity was 0.68 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.85) and the summary specificity was 0.79 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.91). Three studies (209 participants) used EUS; the summary sensitivity was 0.85 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.97) and the summary specificity was 0.90 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.96). In a cohort of 1000 participants with gallbladder polyps, with 10% having true polyps, this would result in 189 overdiagnosed and 32 missed true polyps by TAUS, and 90 overdiagnosed and 15 missed true polyps by EUS. There was no evidence of a difference between the diagnostic accuracy of TAUS and EUS (relative sensitivity 1.06, P = 0.70, relative specificity 1.15, P = 0.12).Differentiation between dysplastic polyps/carcinomas and adenomas/pseudo polyps of the gallbladder: Four studies (1,009 participants) used TAUS; the summary sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.90) and the summary specificity was 0.89 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.97). Three studies (351 participants) used EUS; the summary sensitivity was 0.86 (95% CI 0.76 to 0.92) and the summary specificity was 0.92 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.95). In a cohort of 1000 participants with gallbladder polyps, with 5% having a dysplastic polyp/carcinoma, this would result in 105 overdiagnosed and 11 missed dysplastic polyps/carcinomas by TAUS and 76 overdiagnosed and seven missed dysplastic polyps/carcinomas by EUS. There was no evidence of a difference between the diagnostic accuracy of TAUS and EUS (log likelihood test P = 0.74).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although TAUS seems quite good at discriminating between gallbladder polyps and no polyps, it is less accurate in detecting whether the polyp is a true or pseudo polyp and dysplastic polyp/carcinoma or adenoma/pseudo polyp. In practice, this would lead to both unnecessary surgeries for pseudo polyps and missed cases of true polyps, dysplastic polyps, and carcinomas. There was insufficient evidence that EUS is better compared to TAUS in differentiating between true and pseudo polyps and between dysplastic polyps/carcinomas and adenomas/pseudo polyps. The conclusions are based on heterogeneous studies with unclear criteria for diagnosis of the target conditions and studies at high or unclear risk of bias. Therefore, results should be interpreted with caution. Further studies of high methodological quality, with clearly stated criteria for diagnosis of gallbladder polyps, true polyps, and dysplastic polyps/carcinomas are needed to accurately determine diagnostic accuracy of EUS and TAUS.
Topics: Adenoma; Adult; Carcinoma; Diagnosis, Differential; Endosonography; Gallbladder Diseases; Gallbladder Neoplasms; Humans; Polyps; Sensitivity and Specificity; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 30109701
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012233.pub2 -
Journal of Medical Ultrasonics (2001) Apr 2021Ultrasound (US) is a cost-effective and noninvasive procedure without radiation exposure, with real-time evaluation and high spatial resolution. Although it is useful... (Review)
Review
Ultrasound (US) is a cost-effective and noninvasive procedure without radiation exposure, with real-time evaluation and high spatial resolution. Although it is useful for the detection of gallbladder (GB) polyps, including gallbladder cancer, adenoma, and benign polyps, conventional US is insufficient for differential diagnosis because it is not capable of evaluating hemodynamic information, unlike computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. With recent technological advances in US equipment and contrast agents, Doppler imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) are being used to characterize GB polyps, and several reports on evaluation of the vascularity of GB polyp have been published. In this review, we aimed to report the latest developments in the hemodynamic diagnosis of GB polyps based on previous reports, with an emphasis on CEUS, and to evaluate the efficacy for differential diagnosis. The information in this article is expected to enable early diagnosis and prompt surgical treatment for gallbladder cancer.
Topics: Adult; Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Gallbladder; Gallbladder Neoplasms; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Polyps; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 32125576
DOI: 10.1007/s10396-020-01008-8 -
Radiologic Clinics of North America Jan 2013This article considers the case for a strategic place for ultrasound (US) bowel evaluation focusing on three common clinical contexts. These include imaging for... (Review)
Review
This article considers the case for a strategic place for ultrasound (US) bowel evaluation focusing on three common clinical contexts. These include imaging for suspected acute appendicitis and acute diverticulitis, as well as the role of US in a multimodality approach for the diagnosis and management of inflammatory bowel disease and associated complications.
Topics: Acute Disease; Appendicitis; Contrast Media; Diverticulitis; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 23182513
DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2012.09.008 -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Apr 2022This study aims to compare transvaginal (TVS) and transabdominal (TAS) ultrasonography precision in to evaluate the lower uterine (LUS) thickness in women with a... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to compare transvaginal (TVS) and transabdominal (TAS) ultrasonography precision in to evaluate the lower uterine (LUS) thickness in women with a previous Cesarean section at the term pregnancy; to be an effective method for assessment of previous cesarean scar strength.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An observational cross-sectional study was conducted at kasr el-ainy Hospital in Egypt. From May to November 2020, we admitted 130 pregnant women at term with a previous cesarean section for an elective cesarean delivery. Lower uterine segment thickness was obtained using both transvaginal ultrasound and transabdominal ultrasound before the cesarean. The exact thickness of the lower uterine segment was recorded using a sterile metal ruler before the neonate had been delivered.
RESULTS
The mean thickness of the lower uterine segment obtained by transabdominal ultrasound was 5.2 ± 1.6 mm and 4.8 ± 1.33 mm by transvaginal ultrasound, then compared each of them to the mean actual thickness, which was 4.5 ± 1.22 mm. The lower uterine segment thickness with transabdominal ultrasound showed a good correlation (r = 0.722) with the actual thickness, the correlation with transvaginal ultrasound was better (r = 0.944). A cut-off value transvaginal ultrasound of 3.65 mm with 90.8% sensitivity and 65.6% specificity.
CONCLUSION
Transvaginal ultrasound is more accurate in assessing the thickness of the lower uterine segment than transabdominal ultrasound. A total lower uterine segment thickness of <3.65 is considered a thin scar, and <2.85 mm is associated with a higher risk of uterine dehiscence. The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov registry with clinical trial. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04687891.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Cicatrix; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Ultrasonography; Ultrasonography, Prenatal; Uterus
PubMed: 35203047
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.01.027 -
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology Dec 2021The incidence and mortality rates of pancreatic cancer (PC) are increasing. It is important to discriminate PC from the other pancreatic lesions; however, differential... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The incidence and mortality rates of pancreatic cancer (PC) are increasing. It is important to discriminate PC from the other pancreatic lesions; however, differential diagnosis based on conventional transabdominal ultrasound (US) remains challenging even though US is often the first examination performed. Transabdominal contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has high diagnostic accuracy for PC. This meta-analysis aimed to examine the utility of low-mechanical-index CEUS with enhancement for PC diagnosis. A systematic meta-analysis of all potentially relevant articles was performed. Fixed-effects or random-effects models were used to investigate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR) and negative LR. The study enrolled 983 patients from nine eligible studies. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 92% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-0.94) and 76% (95% CI: 0.71-0.81), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for CEUS was high (53.62). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.95. Funnel plots revealed no publication bias, and there was no significant relationship between the DORs and study characteristics, including continent, type of contrast agent, contrast agent dosage and scan phase. Only number of patients affected diagnostic ability. This meta-analysis indicates that CEUS with enhancement pattern is useful for diagnosis of PC.
Topics: Contrast Media; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Sensitivity and Specificity; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 34465494
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.08.005 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of... Dec 2019Since the 1980s, development of high-resolution transvaginal ultrasound transducers has significantly improved ultrasound evaluation at earlier gestational ages.... (Review)
Review
Since the 1980s, development of high-resolution transvaginal ultrasound transducers has significantly improved ultrasound evaluation at earlier gestational ages. Although many indications exist for first-trimester ultrasound in pregnancy, more emphasis has been placed on assessment of fetal anatomy recently. In turn, congenital diagnoses can also be made earlier in pregnancy, raising the question of whether anatomic assessment in the first trimester is one of choice or obligation. Combining transvaginal and transabdominal approach yields the highest detection rate overall. Some studies have shown that more than half of all anomalies and almost all severe anomalies can be detected on early scans.
Topics: Female; Fetus; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 31677757
DOI: 10.1016/j.ogc.2019.07.011 -
Medical Ultrasonography Dec 2011Transabdominal ultrasound is clinically useful in detecting Crohn's disease (initial diagnosis) by evaluating bowel wall thickness and surrounding structures including... (Review)
Review
Transabdominal ultrasound is clinically useful in detecting Crohn's disease (initial diagnosis) by evaluating bowel wall thickness and surrounding structures including periintestinal inflammatory reaction, extent and localization of involved bowel segments and detection of extraluminal complications such as fistula, abscesses, carcinoma and ileus. Transabdominal ultrasound presently is accepted as a clinically important first line tool in assessing patients with Crohn's disease irrespective of their clinical symptoms and/or disease activity. It helps to better characterize the disease course in individual patients and can guide therapeutic decisions. In this review the current literature will be analysed.
Topics: Contrast Media; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Predictive Value of Tests; Sensitivity and Specificity; Transducers; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Color
PubMed: 22132403
DOI: No ID Found -
Computational and Mathematical Methods... 2021In order to explore the effective diagnosis method of gynecological acute abdomen, this paper takes hospital gynecological acute abdomen patients as samples and selects...
In order to explore the effective diagnosis method of gynecological acute abdomen, this paper takes hospital gynecological acute abdomen patients as samples and selects gynecological acute abdomen patients admitted to the hospital to be included in this study. They are divided into transabdominal ultrasound group, intracavitary ultrasound group, and combined group. Moreover, this paper uses mathematical statistics to carry out sample statistics. The statistical data mainly include ectopic pregnancy, torsion of ovarian tumor pedicle, acute suppurative salpingitis, torsion of fallopian tube, hemorrhagic salpingitis, acute pelvic inflammatory disease, rupture of corpus luteum cyst, and diagnosis accuracy rate. In addition, this paper compares the diagnostic accuracy of the abdominal ultrasound group, the intracavitary ultrasound group, and the combined group. The experimental research shows that the combined ultrasound diagnosis method can effectively improve the accuracy of the diagnosis of gynecological acute abdomen.
Topics: Abdomen, Acute; Computational Biology; Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Genital Diseases, Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy, Ectopic; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 35003327
DOI: 10.1155/2021/9508838 -
Journal of Crohn's & Colitis May 2022
Topics: Chronic Disease; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Intestines; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 34922384
DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab220 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Jan 2022Determining fetal head descent, expressed as fetal head station and engagement is an essential part of monitoring progression in labor. Assessing fetal head station is... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
BACKGROUND
Determining fetal head descent, expressed as fetal head station and engagement is an essential part of monitoring progression in labor. Assessing fetal head station is based on the distal part of the fetal skull, whereas assessing engagement is based on the proximal part. Prerequisites for assisted vaginal birth are that the fetal head should be engaged and its lowermost part at or below the level of the ischial spines. The part of the fetal head above the pelvic inlet reflects the true descent of the largest diameter of the skull. In molded (reshaped) fetal heads, the leading bony part of the skull may be below the ischial spines while the largest diameter of the fetal skull still remains above the pelvic inlet. An attempt at assisted vaginal birth in such a situation would be associated with risks. Therefore, the vaginal or transperineal assessments of station should be supplemented with a transabdominal examination. We suggest a method for the assessment of fetal head descent with transabdominal ultrasound.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the correlation between transabdominal and transperineal assessment of fetal head descent, and to study fetal head shape at different labor stages and head positions.
STUDY DESIGN
Women with term singleton cephalic pregnancies admitted to the labor ward for induction of labor or in spontaneous labor, at the Cairo University Hospital and Oslo University Hospital from December 2019 to December 2020 were included. Fetal head descent was assessed with transabdominal ultrasound as the suprapubic descent angle between a longitudinal line through the symphysis pubis and a line from the upper part of the symphysis pubis extending tangentially to the fetal skull. We compared measurements with transperineally assessed angle of progression and investigated interobserver agreement. We also measured the part of fetal head above and below the symphysis pubis at different labor stages.
RESULTS
The study population comprised 123 women, of whom 19 (15%) were examined before induction of labor, 8 (7%) in the latent phase, 52 (42%) in the active first stage and 44 (36%) in the second stage. The suprapubic descent angle and the angle of progression could be measured in all cases. The correlation between the transabdominal and transperineal measurements was -0.90 (95% confidence interval, -0.86 to -0.93). Interobserver agreement was examined in 30 women and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.98 (95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.99). The limits of agreement were from -9.5 to 7.8 degrees. The fetal head was more elongated in occiput posterior position than in non-occiput posterior positions in the second stage of labor.
CONCLUSION
We present a novel method of examining fetal head descent by assessing the proximal part of the fetal skull with transabdominal ultrasound. The correlation with transperineal ultrasound measurements was strong, especially early in labor. The fetal head was elongated in the occiput posterior position during the second stage of labor.
Topics: Adult; Female; Fetus; Head; Humans; Labor Presentation; Labor Stage, First; Labor Stage, Second; Pregnancy; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 34389293
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.07.030