Positron Emission Tomography/computed Tomography is Superior to Bone Scan in the Diagnosis of Bone Metastases of Malignant Prostate Tumors

Yue Sun,Qingqing Wu,Lixuan Shen,Jiangfeng Wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-22-132
2022-01-01
Translational Andrology and Urology
Abstract:Transl Androl Urol 2022 | https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-22-132 We read the recent published study in this journal of Translational Andrology and Urology by Wang and colleagues entitled “Systematic review & meta-analysis of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and bone scan in the diagnosis of prostate lesions” (1). They performed a meta-analysis to assess the value of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and bone scan (BS) in the diagnosis of bone metastases of malignant prostate tumors. We appreciate Wang et al. for this significant study, whereas, some limitations should be noticed. First, the meaning of the title shows that the aim of the study is to assess the value of PET/CT and BS in the diagnosis of prostate lesions. However, in this study, Wang et al. aimed to evaluate the performance of PET/CT and BS in the diagnosis of bone metastases of malignant prostate tumors. The diagnosis of prostate lesions and diagnosis of bone metastases of malignant prostate tumors are two significantly different concepts. Hence, we believe that the title of this article is not rational. Second, in the statistical analysis section of the study, the authors mentioned the odds ratio (OR) was used as the dichotomous variable. However, it was not reported in the results. Therefore, we think that the irrelevant variable mentioned would lead to misunderstanding. Finally, in the results section of the paper, the highest sensitivity and specificity were revealed. However, this study is a meta-analysis of diagnostic studies, so, the outcome indicators should be the pooled sensitivity and specificity not the highest sensitivity and specificity (2).
What problem does this paper attempt to address?