Copyright
©2008 The WJG Press and Baishideng.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 14, 2008; 14(10): 1479-1490
Published online Mar 14, 2008. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.1479
Published online Mar 14, 2008. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.1479
Pooled sensitivity (%) | Pooled specificity (%) | Pooled LR+ | Pooled LR- | Pooled DOR | |
T1 | 81.6 (77.8-84.9) | 99.4 (99.0-99.7) | 44.4 (15.5-127.4) | 0.2 (0.2-0.4) | 221.5 (118.5-413.9) |
T2 | 81.4 (77.5-84.8) | 96.3 (95.4-97.1) | 16.6 (9.3-29.7) | 0.2 (0.2-0.3) | 90.7 (48.3-170.5) |
T3 | 91.4 (89.5-93.0) | 94.4 (93.1-95.5) | 12.5 (7.7-20.3) | 0.1 (0.1-0.2) | 145.2 (90.3-233.4) |
T4 | 92.4 (89.2-95.0) | 97.4 (96.6-98.0) | 25.4 (13.7-47.0) | 0.1 (0.1-0.2) | 250.0 (145.2-430.5) |
- Citation: Puli SR, Reddy JB, Bechtold ML, Antillon D, Ibdah JA, Antillon MR. Staging accuracy of esophageal cancer by endoscopic ultrasound: A meta-analysis and systematic review. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14(10): 1479-1490
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v14/i10/1479.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.14.1479