Table 4 Summary of previous studies regarding performance of PET/CT and MRI in diagnosing axillary lymph node metastasis

Positron emission tomography fused with computed tomography (PET/CT)

Study

Journal/year/patients

PET/CT drug and dose

Diagnostic criteria

Sensitivity (%)

Specificity (%)

PPV (%)

NPV (%)

Accuracy (%)

Stadnik  et al. [20]

Eur Radiol./2006/10

18F-FDG, 464 ± 56 MBq

NR

100

80

80

100

NR

Riegger  et al. [12]

Acta Radiol./2012/90

18F-FDG, 210–360 MBq

Focally increased PET signal

54

89

77

74

75

Choi  et al. [21]

J Breast Cancer/2012/154

18F-FDG, 5.55 MBq/kg

Pathologic uptake higher than the liver activity

37.3

95.8

NR

NR

NR

Hwang  et al. [11]

J Breast Cancer/2013/349

18F-FDG, 8.1 MBq/kg

Higher level uptake than the background

44.5

94.2

73.2

82.6

81.1

An et al. [10]

Nuklearm-edizin/2014/215

18F-FDG, 370 MBq

Higher level uptake than that of normal background soft tissue and SUVmax

62.7

88.6

77.6

79.1

78.6

Kitajima  et al. [22]

Jpn J Radiol/2016/196

18F-FDG, 4.0 MBq/kg

Higher level uptake than the background and SUVmax

55.4

95.8

NR

NR

84.5

Orsari  et al. [23]

Anticancer Res./2018/50

18F-FDG, 370–450 MBq

Higher level uptake than the background and SUVmax

87

90

93

82

88

Kutluturk et al. [24]

Niger J Clin Pract. /2019/232

18F‐FDG, 0.1 mg/kg

NR

72.6

77.9

88.8

54

74.1

Assi et al. [25]

Front Oncol./2021/268

18F-FDG, 180–296 MBq

Focal uptake with a strong target-to-background ratio

86.6

63.5

78.9

75

77.6

Sae-lim et al

Current study/275

18F-FDG, 370 MBq

Higher level uptake than the background and SUVmax

51.3

82.7

67.4

70.9

69.8

Magnetic resonance imaging

Study

Journal/year/patients

Magnetic field strength

Diagnostic criteria

Sensitivity (%)

Specificity (%)

PPV (%)

NPV (%)

Accuracy (%)

Hwang  et al. [11]

J Breast Cancer/2013/349

1.5 T

Eccentric cortical thickening, irregular or round shape, loss of fatty hilum

47.8

88.7

60.2

82.6

77.9

An et al. [10]

Nuklearm-edizin/2014/215

1.5, 3.0 T

Cortical thickening > 3 mm, obliteration of fatty hilum, mass appearance, regular or round shape

67.5

78

65.9

79.2

74

Kim et al. [26]

Clinical breast cancer/2017/147

3.0 T

Shape, size, the presence of fatty hilum, asymmetrical cortical thickness, ADC value

51.3–59

93.6

74.1–76.7

84.4–86.6

NR

van Nijnatten  et al. [27]

Clin Radiol./2018/90

3.0 T

The absence of contrast hyperintensity and absence of an intact nodal border

38–60

89–93

56–64

79–92

NR

Ahn et al. [28]

Radiol Med./2019/74

3.0 T

Short axis > 0.5 cm, cortical thickness > 0.3 cm, eccentric cortical thickening, loss or compression of the fatty hilum

52.9

89.5

60

86.4

NR

Guvenc  et al. [29]

The breast journal/2019/85

1.5, 3.0 T

Complete absence of the central fatty hilum, LN short axis > 1 cm, displaced fatty hilum, eccentric cortical thickening, matted LNs, irregular cortex, loss of intensity on T2‐weighted imaging, ADC value

79–83

81–98

65–95

89–93

NR

Ramírez-Galván  et al. [30]

Acta Radiol. 2020/44

1.5 T

Cortical thickening, obliteration of fatty hilum, mass appearance, ADC value

66.7

76.7

NR

NR

NR

Kurt et al. [31]

Diagn Interv Radiol./2022/66

1.5 T

Large LN, increased cortex thickness, obliterated hilum

76.7–83.7

69.6–78.3

69.6–86.8

64.3–83.7

NR

Sae-lim et al

Current study/244

3.0 T

Macrolobulated shape, the absence of fatty hilum, cortical thickness greater than 3 mm

70.5

67.8

58.3

78.3

68.9