Li, QianHu, MinChen, ZhikuiLi, ChangtianZhang, XiSong, YiqingXiang, Feixiang2018-10-182018-10-182018-05Li, Q., Hu, M., Chen, Z., Li, C., Zhang, X., Song, Y., & Xiang, F. (2018). Meta-Analysis: Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Versus Conventional Ultrasound for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 44(5), 919–929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2018.01.022https://hdl.handle.net/1805/17561This meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), conventional ultrasound (US) combined with CEUS (US + CEUS) and US for distinguishing breast lesions. From thorough literature research, studies that compared the diagnostic performance of CEUS versus US or US + CEUS versus US, using pathology results as the gold standard, were included. A total of 10 studies were included, of which 9 compared the diagnostic performance of CEUS and US, and 5 studies compared US + CEUS and US. In those comparing CEUS versus US, the pooled sensitivity was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91–0.95) versus 0.87 (95% CI: 0.85–0.90) and pooled specificity was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.84–0.88) versus 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69–0.75). In studies comparing US + CEUS versus US, the pooled sensitivity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92–0.96) versus 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84–0.90) and pooled specificity was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82–0.89) versus 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76–0.84). In terms of diagnosing breast malignancy, areas under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristic (of both CEUS (p = 0.003) and US + CEUS (p = 0.000) were statistically higher than that of US. Both CEUS alone and US + CEUS had better diagnostic performance than US in differentiation of breast lesions, and US + CEUS also had low negative likelihood ratio.enPublisher PolicybreastultrasonographycontrastArticle