Tandon Parul, James Paul, Cordeiro Erin, Mallick Ranjeeta, Shukla Tushar, McCurdy Jeffrey D
*Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; †Division of General Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontaro, Canada; and ‡Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2017 Apr;23(4):551-560. doi: 10.1097/MIB.0000000000001073.
It is unclear if traditional histopathology and noninvasive blood-based tests are sufficiently accurate to detect cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation in inflammatory bowel disease. Therefore, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of these tests compared with immunohistochemistry (IHC) and tissue polymerase chain reaction (PCR).
A systematic search of electronic databases was performed from inception through January 2016 for observational studies comparing diagnostic tests for CMV reactivation in inflammatory bowel disease. IHC and tissue PCR were considered reference standards and were used to evaluate the accuracy of blood-based tests and hematoxylin and eosin histopathology. Weighted summary estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using bivariate analysis.
Nine studies examined the accuracy of blood-based tests for predicting colonic CMV reactivation: 5 studies by pp65 antigenemia and 4 studies by blood PCR. The overall sensitivity was 50.8% (95% CI, 19.9-81.6), the specificity was 99.9% (95% CI, 99-100), and the positive predictive value was 83.8% (95% CI, 58.6-95.0). The sensitivities of pp65 and blood PCR were 39.7% (95% CI, 27.4-52.1) and 60.0% (95% CI, 46.5-73.5), respectively. Nine studies examined the sensitivity of histopathology. The overall sensitivity was 12.5% (95% CI, 3.6-21.4), 34.6% by IHC (95% CI, 13.8-55.4), and 4.7% by tissue PCR (95% CI, 1.2-17.1).
Although blood-based tests seem to predict colonic CMV reactivation, they are insensitive tests. Similarly, histopathology has poor sensitivity for detecting colonic CMV. In agreement with current guidelines, these tests should not replace IHC or tissue PCR for detecting CMV reactivation in inflammatory bowel disease.
传统组织病理学检查和非侵入性血液检测对于检测炎症性肠病中巨细胞病毒(CMV)再激活的准确性是否足够尚不清楚。因此,我们评估了这些检测与免疫组织化学(IHC)和组织聚合酶链反应(PCR)相比的诊断准确性。
从数据库建立至2016年1月,对电子数据库进行系统检索,纳入比较炎症性肠病中CMV再激活诊断检测的观察性研究。将IHC和组织PCR视为参考标准,用于评估血液检测和苏木精-伊红组织病理学检查的准确性。采用双变量分析计算95%置信区间(CI)的加权汇总估计值。
9项研究评估了血液检测预测结肠CMV再激活的准确性:5项研究采用pp65抗原血症检测,4项研究采用血液PCR检测。总体敏感性为50.8%(95%CI,19.9 - 81.6),特异性为99.9%(95%CI,99 - 100),阳性预测值为83.8%(95%CI,58.6 - 95.0)。pp65和血液PCR的敏感性分别为39.7%(95%CI,27.4 - 52.1)和60.0%(95%CI,46.5 - 73.5)。9项研究评估了组织病理学检查的敏感性。总体敏感性为12.5%(95%CI,3.6 - 21.4),IHC敏感性为34.6%(95%CI,13.8 - 55.4),组织PCR敏感性为4.7%(95%CI,1.2 - 17.1)。
虽然血液检测似乎能预测结肠CMV再激活,但这些检测并不敏感。同样,组织病理学检查检测结肠CMV的敏感性较差。与当前指南一致,在炎症性肠病中检测CMV再激活时,这些检测不应替代IHC或组织PCR。