Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Physical Therapy, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, USA.
Eur Spine J. 2020 Jan;29(1):93-112. doi: 10.1007/s00586-019-06048-4. Epub 2019 Jul 16.
To update evidence of diagnostic potential for identification of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) based on demographic and patient history, clinical findings, and physical tests, and report posttest probabilities associated with test findings.
An electronic search of PubMed, CINAHL and Embase was conducted combining terms related to low back pain, stenosis and diagnostic accuracy. Prospective or retrospective studies investigating diagnostic accuracy of LSS using patient history, clinical findings and/or physical tests were included. The risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS 2) tool. Diagnostic accuracy including sensitivities (SN), specificities (SP), likelihood ratios (+LR and -LR) and posttest probabilities (+PTP and -PTP) with 95% confidence intervals were summarized.
Nine studies were included (pooled n = 36,228 participants) investigating 49 different index tests (30 demographic and patient history and 19 clinical findings/physical tests). Of the nine studies included, only two exhibited a low risk of bias and seven exhibited good applicability according to QUADAS 2. The demographic and patient history measures (self-reported history questionnaire, no pain when seated, numbness of perineal region) and the clinical findings/physical tests (two-stage treadmill test, symptoms after a March test and abnormal Romberg test) highly improved positive posttest probability by > 25% to diagnose LSS.
Outside of one study that was able to completely rule out LSS with no functional neurological changes none of the stand-alone findings were strong enough to rule in or rule out LSS. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
根据人口统计学和患者病史、临床发现和体格检查,更新腰椎管狭窄症(LSS)诊断潜力的证据,并报告与检查结果相关的后验概率。
通过结合与下腰痛、狭窄和诊断准确性相关的术语,对 PubMed、CINAHL 和 Embase 进行电子检索。纳入使用患者病史、临床发现和/或体格检查来研究 LSS 诊断准确性的前瞻性或回顾性研究。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估工具(QUADAS 2)评估偏倚风险和适用性。总结包括敏感度(SN)、特异度(SP)、似然比(+LR 和 -LR)和后验概率(+PTP 和 -PTP)在内的诊断准确性,置信区间为 95%。
纳入了 9 项研究(汇总 n=36228 名参与者),研究了 49 项不同的指标检测(30 项人口统计学和患者病史,19 项临床发现/体格检查)。在纳入的 9 项研究中,仅有 2 项研究显示低偏倚风险,7 项研究显示 QUADAS 2 适用性良好。人口统计学和患者病史指标(自我报告病史问卷、坐位时无疼痛、会阴部麻木)和临床发现/体格检查(两阶段跑步机试验、March 试验后出现症状和异常 Romberg 试验)极大地提高了阳性后验概率,诊断 LSS 的概率提高了 25%以上。
除了一项研究能够通过无功能神经改变完全排除 LSS 外,没有任何单一的发现足以排除或确诊 LSS。这些幻灯片可在电子补充材料中检索。