Esophageal Cancer
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
Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in this analysis
AuthorYear of publicationType of enrolmentConfirmatory test
1Takemoto et al1986ConsecutiveSurgery
2Tio et al1986ProspectiveSurgery
3Murata et al1988ConsecutiveSurgery
4Tio et al1989ProspectiveSurgery
5Vilgrain et al1990ConsecutiveSurgery
6Botet et al1991ConsecutiveSurgery
7Tio et al1989ProspectiveSurgery
8Heintz et al1991ConsecutiveSurgery
9Rice et al1991ConsecutiveSurgery
10Ziegler et al1991ConsecutiveSurgery
11Tio et al1990ConsecutiveSurgery
12Fok et al1992ConsecutiveSurgery
13Rosch et al1992ConsecutiveSurgery
14Dittler et al1993ConsecutiveSurgery
15Grimm et al1993ProspectiveSurgery
16Hordijik et al1993ConsecutiveSurgery
17Yoshikane et al1993ConsecutiveSurgery
18Catalano et al1994ConsecutiveSurgery
19Greenberg et al1994ProspectiveSurgery
20Peters et al1994ConsecutiveSurgery
21Binmoeller et al1995ProspectiveSurgery
22Kallimanis et al1995ConsecutiveSurgery
23McLoughlin et al1995ConsecutiveSurgery
24Francois et al1996ConsecutiveSurgery
25Hasegawa et al1996ConsecutiveSurgery
26Holden et al1996ConsecutiveSurgery
27Hunerbein et al1996ConsecutiveSurgery
28Massari et al1996ProspectiveSurgery
29Natsugoe et al1996ConsecutiveSurgery
30Vikers et al1997ConsecutiveSurgery
31Shimizu et al1997ConsecutiveSurgery
32Pham et al1998ConsecutiveSurgery
33Vikers et al1998ProspectiveSurgery
34Browney et al1999ProspectiveSurgery
35Catalano et al1999ProspectiveSurgery
36Nishimaki et al1999ConsecutiveSurgery
37Salminen et al1999ConsecutiveSurgery
38Giovannini et al1999ProspectiveSurgery
39Krasna et al1999ConsecutiveSurgery
40Heidemann et al2000ConsecutiveSurgery
41Nesje et al2000ProspectiveSurgery
42Vazquez-Sequeiros et al2001ConsecutiveSurgery
43Wiersema et al2001ProspectiveSurgery
44Kienle et al2002ProspectiveSurgery
45Wakelin et al2002ConsecutiveSurgery
46Schwartz et al2002ConsecutiveSurgery
47Wu et al2003ProspectiveSurgery
48Shimoyama et al2004ConsecutiveSurgery
49DeWitt et al2005ProspectiveSurgery
Table 2 Accuracy of EUS with CIs to diagnose T stage in esophageal cancer
Pooled sensitivity (%)Pooled specificity (%)Pooled LR+Pooled LR-Pooled DOR
T181.6 (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)
T281.4 (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)
T391.4 (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)
T492.4 (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)
Table 3 Pooled estimate of accuracy of EUS alone and EUS-FNA in nodal staging of esophageal cancer with 95% CIs
EUSEUS-FNA
Studies444
Pooled sensitivity (%)84.7 (82.9-86.4)96.7 (92.4-98.9)
Pooled specificity (%)84.6 (83.2-85.9)95.5 (91.0-98.2)
Positive likelihood ratio3.3 (2.6-4.3)7.3 (0.9-54.3)
Negative likelihood ratio0.24 (0.9-0.3)0.05 (0.01-0.64)
Diagnostic odds ratio19.1 (12.7-28.5)164.5 (4.5-6027.7)
Table 4 Accuracy of EUS with CIs to stage esophageal cancer over the past two decades
YearNo. of studiesPooled sensitivity (%)Pooled specificity (%)Pooled LR+Pooled LR-Pooled DOR
T11986-19441780.4 (75.2-84.8)99.2 (98.4-99.7)41.5 (6.1-283.3)0.25 (0.14-0.43)181.9 (60.7-545.7)
1995-19991183.9 (76.0-90.0)99.4 (98.4-99.8)36.4 (18.5-71.6)0.21 (0.09-0.47)299.9 (107.8-834.1)
2000-2006882.4 (72.6-89.8)100.0 (99.1-100.0)59.5 (22.0-161.1)0.27 (0.16-0.47)261.2 (81.4-838.0)
T21986-19941785.2 (80.2-89.4)96.8 (95.5-97.8)18.6 (5.9-58.6)0.19 (0.12-0.30)123.9 (47.7-322.0)
1995-19991386.8 (79.7-92.1)97.4 (95.8-98.5)16.9 (9.1-31.1)0.20 (0.11-0.38)139.5 (56.6-343.8)
2000-2006862.9 (52.0-72.9)93.4 (90.4-95.6)8.3 (4.3-15.9)0.47 (0.34-0.64)24.7 (9.1-67.4)
T31986-19941890.8 (88.1-93.0)94.6 (92.6-96.2)13.9 (5.2-36.9)0.12 (0.07-0.19)157.7 (70.9-351.1)
1995-19991493.7 (90.0-96.3)96.4 (94.5-97.7)12.6 (7.6-20.9)0.11 (0.08-0.17)159.4 (77.9-326.2)
2000-2006889.9 (84.5-93.9)90.0 (86.1-93.2)7.0 (4.6-10.8)0.11 (0.04-0.32)100.9 (33.5-303.9)
T41986-19941892.1 (87.9-95.2)96.9 (95.6-97.9)24.7 (8.4-72.7)0.09 (0.04-0.23)278.8 (97.2-799.9)
1995-19991489.2 (79.8-95.2)98.0 (96.7-98.96)22.2 (13.2-37.3)0.23 (0.15-0.36)227.1 (89.7-575.0)
2000-20068100.0 (91.8-100.0)97.5 (95.4-98.8)20.2 (8.8-46.3)0.11 (0.04-0.29)272.6 (73.4-1013.2)
N1986-19941788.0 (85.4-90.2)85.2 (83.4-86.9)3.6 (2.4-5.4)0.2 (0.1-0.3)27.6 (14.6-52.4)
1995-19991782.6 (78.0-85.9)84.4 (81.6-86.9)3.0 (2.1-4.5)0.3 (0.2-0.4)14.8 (7.5-29.3)
2000-20051081.6 (77.8-85.1)82.4 (78.2-86.1)3.4 (2.2-5.3)0.3 (0.2-0.4)14.9 (6.7-33.1)
Table 5 Bias indicators and AUC with the corresponding Q values for various cancer stages
Begg-Mazumdar bias (Kendall's tau value, P)Egger bias (95% CI, P)AUC (SE)Q (SE)
T1-0.51, P = 0.01-0.48 (95% CI = -2.84 to 1.88, P = 0.68)0.97 (0.02)0.91 (0.02)
T2-0.14, P = 0.24-0.32 (95% CI = -1.74 to 1.10, P = 0.65)0.95 (0.02)0.89 (0.02)
T3-0.11, P = 0.320.33 (95% CI = -1.43 to 2.09, P = 0.70)0.97 (0.01)0.92 (0.01)
T4-0.07, P = 0.56-2.89 (95% CI = -5.35 to -0.44, P = 0.02)0.98 (0.01)0.93 (0.01)
N-0.26, P = 0.010.29 (95% CI = -1.58 to 1.00, P = 0.69)0.91 (0.02)0.99 (0.02)