Suppr超能文献

消化性溃疡出血患者诊断性检查的准确性:一项系统评价和网状Meta分析

Accuracy of the diagnostic tests in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

作者信息

Vörhendi Nóra, Soós Alexandra, Anne Engh Marie, Tinusz Benedek, Szakács Zsolt, Pécsi Dániel, Mikó Alexandra, Sarlós Patrícia, Hegyi Péter, Eröss Bálint

机构信息

Institute for Translational Medicine, Medical School, Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.

Institute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs, Medical School, Szentágothai Research Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.

出版信息

Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2020 Dec 16;13:1756284820965324. doi: 10.1177/1756284820965324. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Some studies suggest that the accuracy of diagnostic tests is decreased in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). We aimed to assess the accuracy of diagnostic tests for in patients with PUB in a diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic search was carried out in seven databases until November 2019. We collected or calculated true and false positive and negative values, and constructed 2×2 diagnostic contingency tables with reference standards including histology, rapid urease test, urea breath test, serology, stool antigen test, culture, and polymerase chain reaction. We ranked the index tests by the superiority indices (SI) and calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity of each test.

DISCUSSION

Our search yielded 40 eligible studies with 27 different diagnostic strategies for . In 32 articles, the reference standard was a combination of multiple tests. In 12 studies, the index tests were compared with a single testing method. We analyzed seven networks with the reference standards against a single or a combination of diagnostic index tests. None of the index tests had better diagnostic accuracy (SI between 9.94 and 2.17) compared with the individual index tests as all the confidence intervals included 1. Combined testing strategies had higher sensitivities (0.92-0.62) and lower specificities (0.85-0.46) while single tests proved to have higher specificities (0.83-0.77) and lower sensitivities (0.73-0.42).

CONCLUSION

Use of combined tests may have a rationale in clinical practice due to their higher sensitivities. The differences between the included DTA studies limited the comparison of the testing strategies.

摘要

引言

一些研究表明,消化性溃疡出血(PUB)患者诊断试验的准确性会降低。我们旨在通过诊断试验准确性(DTA)网络荟萃分析评估PUB患者诊断试验的准确性。

方法

截至2019年11月,在七个数据库中进行了系统检索。我们收集或计算了真阳性、假阳性、真阴性和假阴性值,并构建了2×2诊断列联表,参考标准包括组织学、快速尿素酶试验、尿素呼气试验、血清学、粪便抗原试验、培养和聚合酶链反应。我们根据优势指数(SI)对指标试验进行排序,并计算每个试验的合并敏感性和特异性。

讨论

我们的检索产生了40项符合条件的研究,涉及27种不同的诊断策略。在32篇文章中,参考标准是多种试验的组合。在12项研究中,指标试验与单一检测方法进行了比较。我们分析了七个网络,将参考标准与单一或组合诊断指标试验进行对照。与单个指标试验相比,没有一个指标试验具有更好的诊断准确性(SI在9.94和2.17之间),因为所有置信区间都包含1。联合检测策略具有较高的敏感性(0.92 - 0.62)和较低特异性(0.85 - 0.46),而单一试验的特异性较高(0.83 - 0.77),敏感性较低(0.73 - 0.42)。

结论

联合检测因其较高的敏感性在临床实践中可能有其合理性。纳入的DTA研究之间的差异限制了检测策略的比较。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/052c/7747116/3b0d76bd6e90/10.1177_1756284820965324-fig1.jpg

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