Herráiz-Adillo Ángel, Cavero-Redondo Iván, Álvarez-Bueno Celia, Martínez-Vizcaíno Vicente, Pozuelo-Carrascosa Diana P, Notario-Pacheco Blanca
Department of Primary Care, Health Service of Castilla-La Mancha (SESCAM), Tragacete, Spain.
Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Health and Social Research Center, Cuenca, Spain.
Int J Clin Pract. 2017 Sep;71(9). doi: 10.1111/ijcp.12994. Epub 2017 Aug 29.
Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) remains underdiagnosed and undertreated, partly because of limitations in the Doppler ankle-brachial index (ABI), the non-invasive gold standard.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the oscillometric ABI and the Doppler ABI, and to examine the influence of two approaches to analysis: legs vs subjects and inclusion of oscillometric errors as PAD equivalents vs exclusion.
Systematic searches in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases were performed, from inception to February 2017. Random-effects models were computed with the Moses-Littenberg constant. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves (HSROC) were used to summarise the overall test performance.
Twenty studies (1263 subjects and 3695 legs) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) for the oscillometric ABI was 32.49 (95% CI: 19.6-53.8), with 65% sensitivity (95% CI: 57-74) and 96% specificity (95%CI: 93-99). In the subgroup analysis, the "per subjects" group showed a better performance than the "per legs" group (dOR 36.44 vs 29.03). Similarly, an analysis considering oscillometric errors as PAD equivalents improved diagnostic performance (dOR 31.48 vs 28.29). The time needed for the oscillometric ABI was significantly shorter than that required for the Doppler ABI (5.90 vs 10.06 minutes, respectively).
The oscillometric ABI showed an acceptable diagnostic accuracy and feasibility, potentially making it a useful tool for PAD diagnosis. We recommend considering oscillometric errors as PAD equivalents, and a "per subject" instead of a "per leg" approach, in order to improve sensitivity. Borderline oscillometric ABI values in diabetic population should raise concern of PAD.
外周动脉疾病(PAD)仍未得到充分诊断和治疗,部分原因在于无创金标准——多普勒踝臂指数(ABI)存在局限性。
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在比较示波法ABI和多普勒ABI的诊断准确性,并探讨两种分析方法的影响:按腿分析与按受试者分析,以及将示波误差视为等同于PAD纳入分析与排除示波误差进行分析。
对EMBASE、MEDLINE、科学网和考克兰图书馆数据库进行了从建库至2017年2月的系统检索。采用Moses-Littenberg常数计算随机效应模型。使用分层汇总受试者工作特征曲线(HSROC)来总结总体测试性能。
荟萃分析纳入了20项研究(1263名受试者和3695条腿)。示波法ABI的合并诊断比值比(dOR)为32.49(95%CI:19.6 - 53.8),灵敏度为65%(95%CI:57 - 74),特异度为96%(95%CI:93 - 99)。在亚组分析中,“按受试者”组的表现优于“按腿”组(dOR分别为36.44和29.03)。同样,将示波误差视为等同于PAD的分析提高了诊断性能(dOR分别为31.48和28.29)。示波法ABI所需时间显著短于多普勒ABI所需时间(分别为5.90分钟和10.06分钟)。
示波法ABI显示出可接受的诊断准确性和可行性,可能使其成为PAD诊断的有用工具。我们建议将示波误差视为等同于PAD,并采用“按受试者”而非“按腿”的方法,以提高灵敏度。糖尿病患者中示波法ABI临界值应引起对PAD的关注。