ObjectiveTo systematically review the diagnostic value of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) for liver metastases. MethodsWe searched databases including CNKI, CBM, VIP, WanFang Data, PubMed, EMbase and The Cochrane Library from January 2011 to December 2014 to collect diagnostic tests about Gd-EOB-DTPA for liver metastases. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies by using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2) tool. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 12.0 software. ResultsA total of 15 studies from seven countries were included, involving 2 040 nodules from 701 patients. The results of meta-analysis showed that, the pooled sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive likelihood ratio (+LR), negative likelihood ratio (-LR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of Gd-EOB-DTPA for liver metastases were 0.92 (95%CI 0.89 to 0.95), 0.94 (95%CI 0.89 to 0.97), 14.51 (95%CI 8.01 to 26.28), 0.08 (95%CI 0.06 to 0.12), and 177.98 (95%CI 89.50 to 353.94), respectively. The area under curve (AUC) of SROC was 0.97 (95%CI 0.95 to 0.98). The results of subgroup analysis showed that Gd-EOB-DTPA had better Sen in nodules >10 mm than the nodules ≤10 mm in diameter (>10 mm: pooled Sen=0.97, 95%CI 0.94 to 0.99; ≤10 mm: pooled Sen=0.75, 95%CI 0.65 to 0.85; P<0.001); The 3.0T MR had better Sen in diagnosing liver metastases compared with 1.5T MR (3.0T: pooled Sen=0.95, 95%CI 0.92 to 0.97; 1.5T: pooled Sen=0.90, 95%CI 0.87 to 0.94; P<0.001). ConclusionGdEOB-DTPA is of value for the detection of liver metastases. In particular, it is of high sensitivity for the detection of nodules larger than 10 mm, and for the cases using 3.0T high-field MR system. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify the above conclusion.
This article discussed the development and current situation about both national and international diagnostic practice guidelines, as well as the role of evidence based medicine and systematic reviews in the development of such guidelines. Authors also analyzed the opportunities and challenges developers faced, and the methods and processes of development. Finally, authors proposed several strategic suggestions about how to improve the quality of diagnostic practice guideline in China.
ObjectiveTo investigate the recommendations on imaging diagnosis in Chinese clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). MethodsWe electronically searched WanFang Data, VIP, CNKI and CBM databases from inception to December 31, 2014. Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data. The method of bibliometrics was used to analyze the data (including basic characteristics, strength of recommendation, quality of evidence, etc.). ResultsA total of 341 CPGs formulating the recommendations on diagnosis were included. 48.7% (166/341) guidelines developed the recommendations on imaging diagnosis (a total of 534). 25.7% (137/534) recommendations were with the symbols of quality of evidence and strength of recommendation, and 18.9% (101/534) with special words such as recommend, suggest. 22.3% (119/534) recommendations reported the strength of recommendation. Of which, 38.7% (46/119) were strong and 16.0% (19/119) were weak. However, 23.9% (11/46) strong recommendations were based on low quality of evidence. And 42.1% (8/19) weak recommendations were based on high quality of evidence. ConclusionAmong Chinese CPGs formulating the recommendations on diagnosis, the number of CPGs with recommendations on imaging is about 50%. And the quantity increases by years. The proportions of recommendations on imaging which report the strength of recommendation and/or quality of evidence are low. Meanwhile, the rating systems are uniform. Then the developers do not report the explanation for the strong recommendations based on low quality of evidence or the weak recommendations based on high quality of evidence in guideline.