Feil Katharina, Feuerecker Regina, Goldschagg Nicolina, Strobl Ralf, Brandt Thomas, von Müller Albrecht, Grill Eva, Strupp Michael
Department of Neurology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Front Neurol. 2018 Feb 27;9:29. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00029. eCollection 2018.
Making the correct diagnosis of patients presenting with vertigo and dizziness in clinical practice is often challenging.
In this study we examined the performance of the iPad based program mex in the prediction of different clinical vertigo and dizziness diagnoses and as a diagnostic tool to distinguish between them.
The data collection was done in the outpatient clinic of the German Center of Vertigo and Balance Disorders. The "gold standard diagnosis" was defined as the clinical diagnosis of the specialist during the visit of the patient based on standardized history and clinical examination. Another independent and blinded physician finalized each patient's case in the constellatory diagnostic system of mex based on an algorithm using all available clinical information. These diagnoses were compared to the "gold standard" by retrospective review of the charts of the patients. The accuracy provided by mex was defined as the number of correctly classified diagnoses. In addition, the probability of being test positive when a disease was present (sensitivity), of being test negative when a disease was absent (specificity), of having the disease when the test is positive (positive predictive value) and of not having the disease when the test is negative (negative predictive value) for the most common diagnoses were reported. Sixteen possible different vertigo and dizziness diagnoses could be provided by mex.
A total of 610 patients (mean age 58.1 ± 16.3 years, 51.2% female) were included. The accuracy for the most common diagnoses was between 82.1 and 96.6% with a sensitivity of 40 to 80.5% and a specificity of more than 80%. When analyzing the quality of mex in a multiclass problem for the six most common clinical diagnoses, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were as follows: Bilateral vestibulopathy (81.6, 97.1, 71.1, and 97.5%), Menière's disease (77.8, 97.6, 87.0, and 95.3%), benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (61.7, 98.3, 86.6, and 93.4%), downbeat nystagmus syndrome (69.6, 97.7, 71.1, and 97.5%), vestibular migraine (34.7, 97.8, 76.1, and 88.3%), and phobic postural vertigo (80.5, 82.5, 52.5, and 94.6%).
This study demonstrates that mex is a new and easy approach to screen for different diagnoses. With the high specificity and negative predictive value, the system helps to rule out differential diagnoses and can therefore also lead to a cost reduction in the health care system. However, the sensitivity was unexpectedly low, especially for vestibular migraine. All in all, this device can only be a complementary tool, in particular for non-experts in the field.
在临床实践中,对出现眩晕和头晕症状的患者做出正确诊断往往具有挑战性。
在本研究中,我们检验了基于iPad的程序mex在预测不同临床眩晕和头晕诊断方面的表现,以及作为区分这些诊断的诊断工具的性能。
数据收集在德国眩晕与平衡障碍中心的门诊进行。“金标准诊断”定义为专家在患者就诊期间基于标准化病史和临床检查做出的临床诊断。另一位独立且不知情的医生根据使用所有可用临床信息的算法,在mex的星座诊断系统中完成每位患者的病例。通过回顾性查阅患者病历,将这些诊断与“金标准”进行比较。mex提供的准确性定义为正确分类诊断的数量。此外,还报告了最常见诊断中疾病存在时检测呈阳性的概率(敏感性)、疾病不存在时检测呈阴性的概率(特异性)、检测呈阳性时患疾病的概率(阳性预测值)以及检测呈阴性时未患疾病的概率(阴性预测值)。mex可提供16种可能不同的眩晕和头晕诊断。
共纳入610例患者(平均年龄58.1±16.3岁,51.2%为女性)。最常见诊断的准确性在82.1%至96.6%之间,敏感性为40%至80.5%,特异性超过80%。在对六种最常见临床诊断的多类问题中分析mex的质量时,敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值如下:双侧前庭病变(81.6%、97.1%、71.1%和97.5%)、梅尼埃病(77.8%、97.6%、87.0%和95.3%)、良性阵发性位置性眩晕(61.7%、98.3%、86.6%和93.4%)、下跳性眼球震颤综合征(69.6%、97.7%、71.1%和97.5%)、前庭性偏头痛(34.7%、97.8%、76.1%和88.3%)以及恐惧性姿势性眩晕(80.5%、82.5%、52.5%和94.6%)。
本研究表明,mex是一种筛查不同诊断的新的简便方法。该系统具有高特异性和阴性预测值,有助于排除鉴别诊断,因此也可降低医疗保健系统的成本。然而,敏感性出乎意料地低,尤其是在前庭性偏头痛方面。总体而言,该设备只能作为一种辅助工具,特别是对于该领域的非专家。