PET‐CT versus MRI in the diagnosis of lymph node metastasis of cervical cancer: A meta‐analysis

Abstract To compare the clinical application value of positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET‐CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis of cervical cancer lymph node metastasis. We searched PubMed and other databases for the studies comparing the use of PET‐CT and MRI for the diagnosis of cervical cancer lymph node metastasis up to January 20, 2021. We strictly followed the inclusion and exclusion criteria to screen the literature and extract the data. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)‐2 tool was used for quality evaluation of included studies, and Revman 5.3 and Stata 15.0 software were used for evaluating heterogeneity, synthesize sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the area under the curve (AUC) and comparing the pretest and posttest probabilities. Finally, 11 studies were included for meta‐analysis. The synthesized results indicated that the SEN value of PET‐CT was 0.65 (0.60 ~ 0.69) and SPE was 0.93 (0.91 ~ 0.94), and the SEN value of MRI was 0.58 (0.54 ~ 0.63) and SPE was 0.91 (0.90 ~ 0.92). AUC of PET‐CT was 0.824, which was significantly higher than that of MRI (AUC = 0.702; p < .05). The subgroup analysis showed that the AUC value of the study based on study design and use of blinding methods was not statistically significant (all p > .05). There was no obvious publication bias in the synthesized analysis of the diagnostic value of PET‐CT and MRI (all p > .05). Highlights To compare positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET‐CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosis of cervical cancer lymph node metastasis. Synthesize sensitivity value of PET‐CT was comparable with that of MRI. Area under the curve of PET‐CT was significantly higher than that of MRI. There was no obvious publication bias in synthesized analysis.