Department of Emergency Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Jul;76(1):67-77. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2020.01.004. Epub 2020 Feb 17.
Skin and soft tissue infections are a common chief complaint in the emergency department. Research has shown that clinical examination alone can be unreliable in distinguishing between cellulitis and abscesses, a distinction that is important because they each require different treatments. Point-of-care ultrasonography has been increasingly studied as a tool to improve the diagnostic accuracy for these skin and soft tissue infections. The primary objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasonography for abscesses. Subgroup analyses are performed for adult versus pediatric patients and high suspicion versus clinically unclear cases. Secondary objectives include the percentage of correct versus incorrect changes in management and reduction in treatment failures because of point-of-care ultrasonography.
PubMed, Scopus, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were assessed from inception to July 26, 2019, for all prospective studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasonography for evaluation of skin and soft tissue abscesses. Data were dual extracted into a predefined work sheet and quality analysis was performed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Diagnostic accuracy was reported as sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR-), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
We identified 14 studies comprising 2,656 total patients. Point-of-care ultrasonography was 94.6% sensitive (95% CI 89.4% to 97.4%) and 85.4% specific (95% CI 78.9% to 90.2%), with an LR+ of 6.5 (95% CI 4.4 to 9.6) and LR- of 0.06 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.13). Among cases with a high pretest suspicion for abscess or cellulitis, point-of-care ultrasonography was 93.5% sensitive (95% CI 90.4% to 95.7%) and 89.1% specific (95% CI 78.3% to 94.9%), with an LR+ of 8.6 (95% CI 4.1 to 18.1) and LR- of 0.07 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.12). Among cases that were clinically unclear, point-of-care ultrasonography was 91.9% sensitive (95% CI 77.5% to 97.4%) and 76.9% specific (95% CI 65.3% to 85.5%), with an LR+ of 4.0 (95% CI 2.5 to 6.3) and LR- of 0.11 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.32). Among adults, point-of-care ultrasonography was 98.7% sensitive (95% CI 95.3% to 99.8%) and 91.0% specific (95% CI 84.4% to 95.4%), with an LR+ of 10.9 (95% CI 6.2 to 19.2) and LR- of 0.01 (95% CI 0.001 to 0.06). Among pediatric patients, point-of-care ultrasonography was 89.9% sensitive (95% CI 81.8% to 94.6%) and 79.9% specific (95% CI 71.5% to 86.3%), with an LR+ of 4.5 (95% CI 3.1 to 6.4) and LR- of 0.13 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.23). Point-of-care ultrasonography led to a correct change in management in 10.3% of cases (95% CI 8.9% to 11.8%) and led to an incorrect change in management in 0.7% of cases (95% CI 0.3% to 1.1%).
According to the current data, point-of-care ultrasonography has good diagnostic accuracy for differentiating abscesses from cellulitis and led to a correct change in management in 10% of cases. Future studies should determine the ideal training and image acquisition protocols.
皮肤和软组织感染是急诊科常见的主要主诉。研究表明,仅凭临床检查可能无法可靠地区分蜂窝织炎和脓肿,因为这两种疾病的治疗方法不同,因此需要进行区分。床边超声检查已越来越多地被研究作为提高这些皮肤和软组织感染诊断准确性的一种工具。本系统评价的主要目的是评估床边超声检查对脓肿的诊断准确性。进行了成人与儿科患者以及高度怀疑与临床不明确病例的亚组分析。次要目标包括管理正确与错误变化的百分比以及由于床边超声检查而减少的治疗失败。
从成立到 2019 年 7 月 26 日,通过 PubMed、Scopus、拉丁美洲和加勒比健康科学文献数据库、护理与联合健康累积索引、Google Scholar、Cochrane 系统评价数据库和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库,对所有前瞻性研究进行评估,以评估床边超声检查对评估皮肤和软组织脓肿的诊断准确性。数据由两名独立人员录入到预定义的工作表中,并使用质量评估诊断准确性研究-2 工具进行质量分析。诊断准确性以敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比(LR+)和阴性似然比(LR-)报告,置信区间(CI)为 95%。
我们确定了 14 项研究,共纳入 2656 名患者。床边超声检查的敏感度为 94.6%(95%CI 89.4%至 97.4%),特异度为 85.4%(95%CI 78.9%至 90.2%),LR+为 6.5(95%CI 4.4 至 9.6),LR-为 0.06(95%CI 0.03 至 0.13)。对于高度怀疑脓肿或蜂窝织炎的病例,床边超声检查的敏感度为 93.5%(95%CI 90.4%至 95.7%),特异度为 89.1%(95%CI 78.3%至 94.9%),LR+为 8.6(95%CI 4.1 至 18.1),LR-为 0.07(95%CI 0.05 至 0.12)。对于临床不明确的病例,床边超声检查的敏感度为 91.9%(95%CI 77.5%至 97.4%),特异度为 76.9%(95%CI 65.3%至 85.5%),LR+为 4.0(95%CI 2.5 至 6.3),LR-为 0.11(95%CI 0.03 至 0.32)。在成人中,床边超声检查的敏感度为 98.7%(95%CI 95.3%至 99.8%),特异度为 91.0%(95%CI 84.4%至 95.4%),LR+为 10.9(95%CI 6.2 至 19.2),LR-为 0.01(95%CI 0.001 至 0.06)。在儿科患者中,床边超声检查的敏感度为 89.9%(95%CI 81.8%至 94.6%),特异度为 79.9%(95%CI 71.5%至 86.3%),LR+为 4.5(95%CI 3.1 至 6.4),LR-为 0.13(95%CI 0.07 至 0.23)。床边超声检查导致 10.3%(95%CI 8.9%至 11.8%)的病例管理正确改变,导致 0.7%(95%CI 0.3%至 1.1%)的病例管理错误改变。
根据目前的数据,床边超声检查对区分脓肿和蜂窝织炎具有良好的诊断准确性,并导致 10%的病例管理正确改变。未来的研究应确定理想的培训和图像采集方案。