Luo Ying, Xue Ying, Mao Liyan, Lin Qun, Tang Guoxing, Song Huijuan, Wang Feng, Sun Ziyong
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Department of Immunology, School of Basic Medicine, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2020 Dec 23;7:585180. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2020.585180. eCollection 2020.
Tuberculous peritonitis (TP) is a common form of abdominal tuberculosis (TB). Diagnosing TP remains challenging in clinical practice. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of peripheral blood (PB) T-SPOT and peritoneal fluid (PF) T-SPOT for diagnosing TP. PubMed, EmBase, Cochrane, Scopus, Google scholar, China national knowledge internet, and Wan-Fang databases were searched for relevant articles from August 1, 2005 to July 5, 2020. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata, Revman, and Meta-Disc software. Diagnostic parameters including pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were determined. Summary receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the area under the curve (AUC). Twelve studies were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. The analysis showed that the pooled sensitivity and specificity of PB T-SPOT in diagnosing TP were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88-0.94) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.73-0.81), respectively, while the pooled PLR, NLR, and DOR were 4.05 (95% CI, 2.73-6.01), 0.13 (95% CI, 0.07-0.23), and 37.8 (95% CI, 15.04-94.98), respectively. On the other hand, the summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and DOR of PF T-SPOT for TP diagnosis were 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.94), 0.78 (95% CI, 0.72-0.83), 6.35 (95% CI, 2.67-15.07), 0.14 (95% CI, 0.09-0.21), and 58.22 (95% CI, 28.76-117.83), respectively. Furthermore, the AUC of PB T-SPOT and PF T-SPOT for TP diagnosis were 0.91 and 0.94, respectively. Our results indicate that both PB T-SPOT and PF T-SPOT can be served as sensitive approaches for the diagnosis of TP. However, the unsatisfactory specificities of these two methods limit their application as rule-in tests for TP diagnosis. Furthermore, the standardization of the operating procedure of PF T-SPOT is further needed.
结核性腹膜炎(TP)是腹部结核病(TB)的常见形式。在临床实践中,TP的诊断仍然具有挑战性。本荟萃分析的目的是评估外周血(PB)T-SPOT和腹腔积液(PF)T-SPOT对TP的诊断准确性。检索了PubMed、EmBase、Cochrane、Scopus、谷歌学术、中国知网和万方数据库,以获取2005年8月1日至2020年7月5日的相关文章。使用Stata、Revman和Meta-Disc软件进行统计分析。确定了诊断参数,包括合并敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比(PLR)、阴性似然比(NLR)和诊断比值比(DOR)。采用汇总受试者工作特征曲线来确定曲线下面积(AUC)。12项研究符合纳入荟萃分析的条件。分析表明,PB T-SPOT诊断TP的合并敏感性和特异性分别为0.91(95%CI,0.88-0.94)和0.78(95%CI,0.73-0.81),而合并PLR、NLR和DOR分别为4.05(95%CI,2.73-6.01)、0.13(95%CI,0.07-0.23)和37.8(95%CI,15.04-94.98)。另一方面,PF T-SPOT诊断TP的敏感性、特异性、PLR、NLR和DOR的汇总估计值分别为0.90(95%CI,0.85-0.94)、0.78(95%CI,0.72-0.83)、6.35(95%CI,2.67-15.07)、0.14(95%CI,0.09-0.21)和58.22(95%CI,28.76-117.83)。此外,PB T-SPOT和PF T-SPOT诊断TP的AUC分别为0.91和0.94。我们的结果表明,PB T-SPOT和PF T-SPOT均可作为诊断TP的敏感方法。然而,这两种方法的特异性不尽人意限制了它们作为TP诊断的确诊试验的应用。此外,PF T-SPOT操作程序的标准化仍有待进一步完善。