Roebuck D J, Howard R G, Metreweli C
Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Organ Imaging, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Br J Radiol. 1999 Apr;72(856):345-8. doi: 10.1259/bjr.72.856.10474494.
The English language medical literature was reviewed to determine the strength of the published evidence for the assertion that dimercaptosuccinic acid scintigraphy (DMSA) is superior to ultrasound (US) in the detection of established renal scarring in children. The MEDLINE database was used to identify papers published between 1985 and 1997 that claimed to be concerned with the detection of scars, and contained sufficient information to permit calculation of the sensitivity of US relative to DMSA. Only 10 studies were identified. The sensitivity of US for scarring, using DMSA as a gold standard, ranged from 37% to 100%, and its specificity from 65% to 99%. These wide ranges mean that evaluation of the role of US in the detection of scarring remains controversial. All papers contained methodological flaws. Allowing for these, the sensitivity of US appears to be acceptable. Further research that avoids these methodological problems is required.
对英文医学文献进行了回顾,以确定已发表证据的力度,该证据表明在检测儿童已形成的肾瘢痕方面,二巯基丁二酸闪烁扫描法(DMSA)优于超声检查(US)。利用MEDLINE数据库识别1985年至1997年间发表的声称涉及瘢痕检测且包含足够信息以计算超声相对于DMSA的敏感性的论文。仅识别出10项研究。以DMSA作为金标准,超声检测瘢痕的敏感性范围为37%至100%,特异性范围为65%至99%。如此大的范围意味着对超声在瘢痕检测中的作用的评估仍存在争议。所有论文都存在方法学缺陷。考虑到这些,超声的敏感性似乎是可以接受的。需要进一步开展避免这些方法学问题的研究。