Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging

Research Article

Diagnostic Value of Seven Different Imaging Modalities for Patients with Neuroblastic Tumors: A Network Meta-Analysis

Table 2

Pairwise meta-analysis for sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV, and DR of NTs.


Included studies	Comparisons	Heterogeneity assessment		Pairwise meta-analysis
Included studies	Comparisons	I²	P_h	OR (95%CI)	Z	P

Sensitivity
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. ¹²³I-MIBG	0.0%	0.887	7.458 (4.108–13.543)	6.60	＜0.001
2 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	0.0%	0.516	2.032 (1.054–3.918)	2.12	0.034
6 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ¹⁸F-FDG	75.1%	0.001	1.514 (0.491–4.669)	0.72	0.470
1 study	¹²³I-MIBG vs ¹¹¹In-pentetreotide	NA	NA	9.486 (3.484–25.826)	4.40	＜0.001
3 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. CT or MRI	85.1%	0.001	0.115 (0.011–1.170)	1.83	0.068
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. CT or MRI	0.0%	0.606	10.195 (5.332–19.493)	7.02	＜0.001
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	0.0%	0.726	1.937 (0.380–9.859)	0.80	0.426
2 studies	CT or MRI vs. ¹⁸F-FDG	0.0%	0.413	2.674 (1.066–6.705)	2.10	0.036

Specificity
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. ¹²³I-MIBG	3.8%	0.308	3.685 (0.480–28.311)	1.25	0.210
6 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ¹⁸F-FDG	82.0%	0.001	1.007 (0.043–23.643)	0.00	0.996
3 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. CT or MRI	94.3%	＜0.001	10.378 (0.101–1064.73)	0.99	0.322
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. CT or MRI	0.0%	0.392	17.906 (5.950–53.884)	5.13	＜0.001
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	45.9%	0.174	0.269 (0.049–1.496)	1.50	0.134
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. CT or MRI	10.0%	0.292	9.435 (5.231–17.019)	7.46	＜0.001

NPV
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. ¹²³I-MIBG	54.6%	0.138	3.255 (0.230–46.060)	0.87	0.383
6 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ¹⁸F-FDG	65.4%	0.013	1.519 (0.538–4.283)	0.79	0.430
3 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. CT or MRI	90.4%	＜0.001	0.352 (0.014–8.878)	0.63	0.526
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. CT or MRI	0.0%	0.583	16.819 (7.033–40.218)	6.35	＜0.001
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	0.0%	0.491	1.038 (0.210–5.126)	0.05	0.964
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. CT or MRI	0.0%	0.689	1.472 (0.507–4.277)	0.71	0.477

PPV
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. ¹²³I-MIBG	0.0%	0.816	9.869 (1.722–56.560)	2.57	0.010
6 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ¹⁸F-FDG	80.9%	0.001	0.908 (0.045–18.281)	0.06	0.950
3 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. CT or MRI	92.8%	＜0.001	3.184 (0.083–122.471)	0.62	0.534
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. CT or MRI	0.0%	0.388	11.154 (4.216–29.512)	4.86	＜0.001
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	17.6%	0.271	0.480 (0.100–2.308)	0.92	0.360
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. CT or MRI	0.0%	0.354	2.976 (1.774–4.992)	4.13	＜0.001

DR
4 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. ¹²³I-MIBG	0.0%	0.662	5.616 (3.609–8.739)	7.64	＜0.001
1 study	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ⁶⁸Ga-SSAs	NA	NA	0.280 (0.075–1.047)	1.89	0.059
4 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	55.7%	0.079	1.153 (0.464–2.864)	0.31	0.759
8 studies	¹²³I-MIBG vs. ¹⁸F-FDG	91.2%	＜0.001	1.990 (0.842–4.702)	1.57	0.117
1 study	¹²³I-MIBG vs ¹¹¹In-pentetreotide	NA	NA	9.486 (3.484–25.826)	4.40	＜0.001
4 studies	CT or MRI vs. ¹²³I-MIBG	87.2%	＜0.001	4.654 (1.783–12.150)	3.14	0.002
2 studies	¹⁸F-FDOPA vs. CT or MRI	80.1%	0.025	1.363 (0.411–4.522)	0.51	0.613
1 study	⁶⁸Ga-SSAs vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	NA	NA	1.000 (0.232–4.310)	0.00	1.000
6 studies	¹⁸F-FDG vs. ¹³¹I-MIBG	88.7%	＜0.001	0.284 (0.048–1.673)	1.39	0.164
2 studies	CT or MRI vs. ¹⁸F-FDG	0.0%	0.882	4.599 (2.968–7.126)	6.83	＜0.001
1 study	¹³¹I-MIBG vs. CT or MRI	NA	NA	3.086 (1.350–7.054)	2.67	0.008

NTs, neuroblastic tumors; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; DR, detection rate.