Suppr超能文献

用于诊断腕管综合征的诊断工具的前瞻性比较。

A Prospective Comparison of Diagnostic Tools for the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

作者信息

Wang William L, Buterbaugh Kristin, Kadow Tiffany R, Goitz Robert J, Fowler John R

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.

出版信息

J Hand Surg Am. 2018 Sep;43(9):833-836.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.05.022. Epub 2018 Jun 21.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Nerve conduction studies (NCS), CTS-6, Wainner, Kamath, and Lo are diagnostic tests that are used to diagnose carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). To our knowledge, no study has compared the sensitivity and specificity of these 5 tests with one another. The purpose of this study is to compare NCS, CTS-6, Wainner, Kamath, and Lo using clinical diagnosis by a hand fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeon as reference standard.

METHODS

A hand fellowship-trained surgeon completed the CTS-6, Wainner, Kamath, and Lo diagnostic tools. Cutoff values for a positive test were based on values in the literature, if available. The NCS were performed by a certified electrodiagnostic physician according the standards of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine and were interpreted using absolute latencies, relative latencies, and combined sensory index. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio were calculated for the tests using clinical diagnosis as the reference standard.

RESULTS

A total of 408 wrists from 250 patients were analyzed in the study. The NCS had the highest sensitivity (94%) but also the lowest specificity (50%) of any of the diagnostic tests. Using a cutoff of 18, CTS-6 had the highest specificity (99%). The NCS had the highest area under the curve at 74%, followed closely by the Kamath at 69%.

CONCLUSIONS

The NCS were traditionally felt to be a strong confirmatory test given their high specificity. However, this prospective series demonstrated that NCS had the lowest specificity of any diagnostic test.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Consideration should be given to using alternative diagnostic tests/tools based on the results of this study.

摘要

目的

神经传导研究(NCS)、CTS-6、韦纳(Wainner)、卡马特(Kamath)和洛(Lo)检查是用于诊断腕管综合征(CTS)的诊断性检查。据我们所知,尚无研究对这5项检查的敏感性和特异性进行相互比较。本研究的目的是以经过手外科专科培训的骨科医生的临床诊断为参考标准,比较NCS、CTS-6、Wainner、Kamath和Lo检查。

方法

一位经过手外科专科培训的外科医生完成了CTS-6、Wainner、Kamath和Lo诊断工具的检查。阳性检查的临界值(如有可用的文献值)基于文献中的值。NCS由一名经过认证的电诊断医生按照美国神经肌肉和电诊断医学协会的标准进行操作,并使用绝对潜伏期、相对潜伏期和综合感觉指数进行解读。以临床诊断为参考标准,计算各项检查的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、阳性似然比和阴性似然比。

结果

本研究共分析了250例患者的408只手腕。NCS在所有诊断性检查中敏感性最高(94%),但特异性最低(50%)。采用临界值18时,CTS-6的特异性最高(99%)。NCS的曲线下面积最高,为74%,紧随其后的是Kamath,为69%。

结论

传统上认为NCS因其高特异性是一项强有力的确诊检查。然而,这个前瞻性系列研究表明,NCS在所有诊断性检查中特异性最低。

临床意义

应根据本研究结果考虑使用其他诊断性检查/工具。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验