Original investigationDiagnostic Performance of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound in Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis
Introduction
Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers in males. The American Cancer Society estimates that in 2012 PCa will account for 29% of new cancer diagnoses in men and 9% of cancer-related deaths in the United States (1). Early detection is the key to successful treatment. Digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen, conventional transrectal ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging have been the main methods for detecting PCa. These methods are available but the diagnosis of PCa is far from optimal 2, 3. Grayscale transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy is the reference standard method, however, it has been shown that this approach missed clinically relevant cancers. Autopsy studies have demonstrated that sensitivity of sextant prostate biopsy was 30%, with increasing sensitivity with increasing numbers of biopsy cores, 36%–58% for 12-core biopsies, and 53%–58% for 18-core biopsies (4). PCa is multifocal and heterogeneous in nature, making it difficult to detect all cancers, sites, and grades (5). Thus, new techniques that help us to display more cancerous lesions and to target areas of high cancer incidence are desirable.
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging was developed to real-time image perfusion 6, 7. Ultrasound contrast agents consist of small encapsulated gas bubbles that are administered intravenously and remain intravascular. Adding microbubbles as additional reflectors into the bloodstream increase the sensitivity of imaging. Numerous studies have been performed to assess the diagnostic performance of CEUS in the evaluation of prostate lesions (8). These studies yield varying estimates of sensitivity and specificity, which are probably caused by advances in technology, differences in scan protocols, and heterogeneity in patient populations. The purpose of our study, therefore, was to perform a systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis of the literature to determine the overall diagnostic value of CEUS for PCa.
Section snippets
Data Sources and Exclusion Criteria
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of our institution. The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the recently published recommendations and checklist of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement (9). Literature searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases for publications up to August 2012. The search strategy, which included the use of both pertinent Medical Subject Headings, or MeSH, and free
Study Selection and Characteristics
By using the search terms described earlier, we identified 405 studies. One hundred and twelve studies were excluded because of overlap between the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Our search excluded 201 studies based on the title and abstract. Forty-four citations were excluded because of a lack of original data. Forty-eight citations were then retrieved for full text review. Thirty-two were excluded because of lack of control subjects or portion of data have been published previously. After
Discussion
Meta-analysis is a statistical analysis that combines or integrates the results of several independent studies (33). Using meta-analysis is possible to explain variations in study results and additionally may be used to highlight important defects in the quality of primary studies and to identify areas of future research 34, 35. The reliability of the results depends on the quality of the included studies and whether the result of the analysis is reliable. Our review was based on thorough
Conclusions
In summary, this systematic review describes the diagnostic test performance of CEUS for detection of PCa. Our results suggested that CEUS can be used as a diagnostic method in patients suspected of PCa. But it should not be used as sole biopsy guidance and cannot completely replace systematic biopsy under the present circumstances. Reliability of CEUS is not only dependent on diagnostic criteria, but also the training and expertise of operators. We realize it is necessary to standardize
References (41)
- et al.
PSA updated: still relevant in the new millennium?
Eur Urol
(2005) - et al.
Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications
J Urol
(1997) - et al.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
J Clin Epidemiol
(2009) - et al.
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
Control Clin Trials
(1986) - et al.
Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy with conventional systematic biopsy: impact on prostate cancer detection
J Urol
(2002) - et al.
Prostate cancer detection in men with prostate specific antigen 4 to 10 ng/ml using a combined approach of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted and systematic biopsy
J Urol
(2005) - et al.
Contrast enhanced color Doppler endorectal sonography of prostate: efficiency for detecting peripheral zone tumors and role for biopsy procedure
J Urol
(2003) - et al.
The value of contrast enhanced power Doppler ultrasonography in differentiating hypoechoic lesions in the peripheral zone of prostate
Eur J Radiol
(2005) - et al.
Results of vardenafil mediated power Doppler ultrasound, contrast enhanced ultrasound and systematic random biopsies to detect prostate cancer
J Urol
(2011) - et al.
Contrast-enhanced three-dimensional power Doppler angiography of the human prostate: correlation with biopsy outcome
Urology
(1999)
Contrast-enhanced gray-scale transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in men with elevated serum prostate-specific antigen levels
Acad Radiol
Contrast-enhanced transrectal ultrasound (CE-TRUS) with cadence-contrast pulse sequence (CPS) technology for the identification of prostate cancer
Urol Oncol
Cancer statistics
CA Cancer J Clin
Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer
Top Magn Reson Imaging
Saturation biopsies on autopsied prostates for detecting and characterizing prostate cancer
BJU Int
Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound
Ultraschall Med
The powerful microbubble: from bench to bedside, from intravascular indicator to therapeutic delivery system, and beyond
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol
Transrectal contrast enhanced ultrasound for diagnosis of prostate cancer
World J Urol
The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews
BMC Med Res Methodol
Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies
BMC Med Res Methodol
Cited by (45)
Whole-Body Imaging Using Low Frequency Transmission Ultrasound
2023, Academic RadiologyLow frequency 3D transmission ultrasound tomography: technical details and clinical implications
2023, Zeitschrift fur Medizinische PhysikContribution of Radiology to Staging of Prostate Cancer
2019, Seminars in Nuclear MedicineCitation Excerpt :Several radiological imaging modalities have been used for detecting prostate cancer, including US, CT and MRI. Although there have been several reports showing that US (especially with advanced US technology such as elastography and contrast-enhanced US) and CT can be helpful, these modalities have inherent pitfalls such as high inter-operator variability (for US) and limited capability for soft tissue contrast, which hinders their application in clinical practice.3-6 Currently, MRI is accepted as the conventional imaging method that can be used to detect the index primary prostatic lesion with the highest accuracy and reproducibility.
Sonography of the prostate: Relevance for urologists in daily clinical routine
2022, Journal fur Urologie und Urogynakologie