Direct comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose PET/CT and MRI for the differentiation of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour in neurofibromatosis type I: a meta-analysis

•F-18 FDG PET/CT and MRI were compared for differentiation of MPNSTs. •Both techniques showed similar accuracies for differentiation of MPNSTs. •Each modality can be a complement to other rather than being used singly. AIM To compare the diagnostic test of integrated 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) with that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the differentiation of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours (MPNSTs) in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE (last updated in 30 November 2022). Studies investigating the performance of FDG PET/CT and MRI for differentiation of MPNSTs were eligible for inclusion. Only studies reporting a direct comparison between these imaging methods were considered to establish precise summary estimates in the same setting of patients. RESULTS The pooled estimate of sensitivity of FDG PET/CT was 0.99 and a pooled specificity of 0.53. The pooled estimate of sensitivity of MRI was 0.85 and a pooled specificity of 0.85. CONCLUSION Analysis of the available studies indicated that FDG PET/CT and MRI had similar diagnostic performances for differentiation of MPNSTs in patients with NF1; however, either technique can be a complement to the other rather than being used singly. To compare the diagnostic test of integrated 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) with that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the differentiation of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours (MPNSTs) in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) patients. A systematic search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE (last updated in 30 November 2022). Studies investigating the performance of FDG PET/CT and MRI for differentiation of MPNSTs were eligible for inclusion. Only studies reporting a direct comparison between these imaging methods were considered to establish precise summary estimates in the same setting of patients. The pooled estimate of sensitivity of FDG PET/CT was 0.99 and a pooled specificity of 0.53. The pooled estimate of sensitivity of MRI was 0.85 and a pooled specificity of 0.85. Analysis of the available studies indicated that FDG PET/CT and MRI had similar diagnostic performances for differentiation of MPNSTs in patients with NF1; however, either technique can be a complement to the other rather than being used singly.