Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Vocal fold paralysis (VFP), involving one or both vocal folds, often indicates underlying pathologies. Identifying VFP causes is vital for excluding malignancies and focusing on treating the cause. While various imaging methods are used to investigate VFP causes, their detection abilities remain unclear. This study aims to assess the detection prevalence of different imaging techniques in determining the causes of VFP.
METHODS: In September 2023 a comprehensive search was conducted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines across multiple databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE. Following the search, the retrieved studies were screened based on the predefined eligibility criteria. Data extraction from the included studies was carried out independently by two authors. Outcomes were analyzed using pooled proportions and 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: Our meta-analysis encompassed 14 studies with 1492 VFP patients included. Malignant causes for VFP identification were most prevalent in F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (PET)/Computed Tomography (CT) (41.5%) followed by Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (40%), with CT being the lowest (17.1%). Conversely, benign causes had the highest prevalence in F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT (10.8%), followed by MRI (6.7%) and CT (4%). In the VFP cause identification, MRI had the highest detection prevalence (58.1%), followed by CT (30.1%), and Ultra Sound (US) had the lowest (26.8%). In chest lesion detection, CT had the highest prevalence (17.6%), followed by Chest X-ray (CXR) (6.5%). Head lesions were detected with CT at a prevalence of 15%, while neck lesion detection showed CT prevalence at 38.9% and US at 20.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed varying prevalence rates for the identification of malignant and benign causes across different imaging modalities. MRI demonstrated the highest overall detection prevalence for VFP causes, while CT was most commonly used and had the highest prevalence for specific lesions detection in various regions. These findings provide valuable insights into the diagnostic utility of different imaging techniques in the evaluation of VFP.
METHODS: In September 2023 a comprehensive search was conducted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines across multiple databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE. Following the search, the retrieved studies were screened based on the predefined eligibility criteria. Data extraction from the included studies was carried out independently by two authors. Outcomes were analyzed using pooled proportions and 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: Our meta-analysis encompassed 14 studies with 1492 VFP patients included. Malignant causes for VFP identification were most prevalent in F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (PET)/Computed Tomography (CT) (41.5%) followed by Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (40%), with CT being the lowest (17.1%). Conversely, benign causes had the highest prevalence in F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT (10.8%), followed by MRI (6.7%) and CT (4%). In the VFP cause identification, MRI had the highest detection prevalence (58.1%), followed by CT (30.1%), and Ultra Sound (US) had the lowest (26.8%). In chest lesion detection, CT had the highest prevalence (17.6%), followed by Chest X-ray (CXR) (6.5%). Head lesions were detected with CT at a prevalence of 15%, while neck lesion detection showed CT prevalence at 38.9% and US at 20.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed varying prevalence rates for the identification of malignant and benign causes across different imaging modalities. MRI demonstrated the highest overall detection prevalence for VFP causes, while CT was most commonly used and had the highest prevalence for specific lesions detection in various regions. These findings provide valuable insights into the diagnostic utility of different imaging techniques in the evaluation of VFP.
摘要：
背景：声带麻痹（VFP），涉及一个或两个声带，通常表明潜在的病理。确定VFP病因对于排除恶性肿瘤并专注于治疗病因至关重要。虽然各种成像方法被用来调查VFP的原因，他们的检测能力仍不清楚。本研究旨在评估不同成像技术在确定VFP原因中的检测患病率。
方法：2023年9月，根据系统评价和荟萃分析（PRISMA）指南的首选报告项目，在多个数据库中进行了全面搜索。包括WebofScience,PubMed,Scopus,科克伦中部,和EMBASE。搜索之后,检索到的研究是根据预定义的资格标准进行筛选的.纳入研究的数据提取由两名作者独立进行。使用合并比例和95%置信区间分析结果。
结果：我们的荟萃分析包括14项研究，包括1492例VFP患者。VFP识别的恶性原因在F-氟脱氧葡萄糖正电子发射断层扫描（PET）/计算机断层扫描（CT）中最普遍（41.5％），其次是磁共振成像（MRI）（40％），CT最低（17.1%）。相反，良性原因在F-氟脱氧葡萄糖PET/CT中的患病率最高(10.8%),其次是MRI（6.7％）和CT（4％）。在VFP原因识别中，MRI的检出率最高(58.1%),其次是CT（30.1%），UltraSound（美国）最低（26.8%）。在胸部病变检测中，CT的患病率最高（17.6%），其次是胸部X线(CXR)(6.5%)。CT检查发现头部病变的患病率为15%，而颈部病变检测显示CT患病率为38.9%，US为20.6%。
结论：我们的研究显示，在不同的影像学模式下，鉴别恶性和良性病因的患病率不同。MRI显示VFP病因的总体检出率最高，而CT是最常用的，并且在各个地区检测特定病变的患病率最高。这些发现为不同成像技术在评估VFP中的诊断效用提供了有价值的见解。
方法：2023年9月，根据系统评价和荟萃分析（PRISMA）指南的首选报告项目，在多个数据库中进行了全面搜索。包括WebofScience,PubMed,Scopus,科克伦中部,和EMBASE。搜索之后,检索到的研究是根据预定义的资格标准进行筛选的.纳入研究的数据提取由两名作者独立进行。使用合并比例和95%置信区间分析结果。
结果：我们的荟萃分析包括14项研究，包括1492例VFP患者。VFP识别的恶性原因在F-氟脱氧葡萄糖正电子发射断层扫描（PET）/计算机断层扫描（CT）中最普遍（41.5％），其次是磁共振成像（MRI）（40％），CT最低（17.1%）。相反，良性原因在F-氟脱氧葡萄糖PET/CT中的患病率最高(10.8%),其次是MRI（6.7％）和CT（4％）。在VFP原因识别中，MRI的检出率最高(58.1%),其次是CT（30.1%），UltraSound（美国）最低（26.8%）。在胸部病变检测中，CT的患病率最高（17.6%），其次是胸部X线(CXR)(6.5%)。CT检查发现头部病变的患病率为15%，而颈部病变检测显示CT患病率为38.9%，US为20.6%。
结论：我们的研究显示，在不同的影像学模式下，鉴别恶性和良性病因的患病率不同。MRI显示VFP病因的总体检出率最高，而CT是最常用的，并且在各个地区检测特定病变的患病率最高。这些发现为不同成像技术在评估VFP中的诊断效用提供了有价值的见解。
