LAUSR

Several systematic reviews have investigated the accuracy of imaging modalities for lymph node involvement of rectal cancer, but there are considerable differences in conclusions. This overview aimed to assess the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews that evaluated the diagnostic value of imaging modalities for lymph node involvement in patients with rectal cancer and to compare the diagnostic value of different modalities for lymph node involvement. The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Chinese Biomedicine Literature were searched to identify relevant systematic reviews. The methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist, and the reporting quality was assessed using PRISMA-DTA checklist. The indirect comparison was conducted to compare the accuracy of different imaging modalities. Seven systematic reviews involving 353 primary studies were included. The median (Range) AMSTAR scores were 6.0 (4.0–9.0); the median (Range) PRISMA-DTA scores were 18.0 (11.0–23.0). Sensitivity of MRI [0.69 (95% CI 0.63, 0.77)] was significantly higher than that of ERUS [0.57 (95% CI 0.53, 0.62)]. Specificity of ERUS [0.80 (95% CI 0.77, 0.83)] was significantly higher than that of CT [0.72 (95% CI 0.67, 0.78)]. Positive likelihood ratio of EUS [3.04 (95% CI 2.75, 3.36)] was significantly higher than that of CT [2.21 (95% CI 1.69, 2.90)]. EUS had better diagnostic value than CT and ERUS in the diagnosis of lymph node involvement. Compared with CT and ERUS, MRI was more sensitive. EUS and MRI had comparable diagnostic accuracy, but no modality was proved to be particularly accurate.