Diagnostic Accuracy of MRI for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Pancreatic Cystic Lesions Compared to CT and Endoscopic Ultrasound: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Abstract

Differentiation of benign and malignant pancreatic cystic lesions on MRI, computed tomography (CT), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is critical for determining management. To perform a systematic review evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for diagnosing malignant pancreatic cystic lesions, and to compare the accuracy of MRI to CT and EUS. Systematic review and meta-analysis. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched until February 2020 for studies reporting MRI accuracy for assessing pancreatic cystic lesions. 1.5T or 3.0T. Methodologic and outcome data were extracted by two reviewers (AU and MA, 2 years of experience each). All studies of pancreatic cystic lesions on MRI were identified. Studies with incomplete MRI technique were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. Sensitivity/specificity was pooled using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). Pairwise-comparison of MRI to CT and EUS was performed. The impact of gadolinium-based contrast agents, mucinous lesions, and risk of bias were explored using meta-regression. MRI pooled sensitivity was 76% (95%CI 67% to 84%) and specificity was 80% (95%CI 74% to 85%) for distinguishing benign and malignant lesions. MRI and CT had similar sensitivity (P=0.822) and specificity (P=0.096), but MRI was more specific than EUS (80% vs. 75%, P < 0.05). Studies including only contrast-enhanced MRI were more sensitive than those including unenhanced exams (P < 0.05). MRI sensitivity and specificity did not differ for mucinous lesions (P=0.537 and P=0.384, respectively) or for studies at risk of bias (P=0.789 and P=0.791, respectively). MRI and CT demonstrate comparable accuracy for diagnosing malignant pancreatic cystic lesions. EUS is less specific than MRI, which suggests that, in some cases, management should be guided by MRI findings rather than EUS. 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 2.