Suppr超能文献

急诊急性眩晕或头晕患者神经影像学诊断准确性的系统评价和荟萃分析:为急诊合理和适当护理制定的指南。

Diagnostic accuracy of neuroimaging in emergency department patients with acute vertigo or dizziness: A systematic review and meta-analysis for the guidelines for reasonable and appropriate care in the emergency department.

机构信息

Evidence-Based Practice Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Department of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

出版信息

Acad Emerg Med. 2023 May;30(5):517-530. doi: 10.1111/acem.14561. Epub 2022 Aug 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute vertigo or dizziness represent a diagnostic challenge. Neuroimaging has variable indications and yield. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of neuroimaging for patients presenting with acute vertigo or dizziness.

METHODS

An electronic search was designed following patient-intervention-control-outcome (PICO) question-(P) adult patients with acute vertigo or dizziness presenting to the ED; (I) neuroimaging including computed tomography (CT), CT angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), and ultrasound (US); (C) MRI/clinical criterion standard; and (O) central causes (stroke, hemorrhage, tumor, others) versus peripheral causes of symptoms. Articles were assessed in duplicate. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to assess certainty of evidence in pooled estimates.

RESULTS

We included studies that reported diagnostic test accuracy. From 6309 titles, 460 articles were retrieved, and 12 were included: noncontrast CT scan-six studies, 771 patients, pooled sensitivity 28.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.4%-48.5%, moderate certainty) and specificity 98.9% (95% CI 93.4%-99.8%, moderate certainty); MRI-five studies, 943 patients, sensitivity 79.8% (95% CI 71.4%-86.2%, high certainty) and specificity 98.8% (95% CI 96.2%-100%, high certainty); CTA-one study, 153 patients, sensitivity 14.3% (95% CI 1.8%-42.8%) and specificity 97.7% (95% CI 93.8%-99.6%), CT had higher sensitivity than CTA (21.4% and 14.3%) for central etiology; MRA-one study, 24 patients, sensitivity 60.0% (95% CI 26.2%-87.8%) and specificity 92.9% (95% CI 66.1%-99.8%); US-three studies, 258 patients, sensitivity ranged from 30% to 53.6%, specificity from 94.9% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Noncontrast CT has very low sensitivity and MRI will miss approximately one in five patients with stroke if imaging is obtained early after symptom onset. The evidence does not support neuroimaging as the only tool for ruling out stroke and other central causes in patients with acute dizziness or vertigo presenting to the ED.

摘要

背景

急诊科(ED)出现急性眩晕或头晕的患者具有诊断挑战性。神经影像学具有不同的适应证和结果。我们旨在对神经影像学在急性眩晕或头晕患者中的诊断准确性进行系统评价和荟萃分析。

方法

根据患者干预对照结局(PICO)问题设计电子搜索-(P)成人急性眩晕或头晕就诊于 ED;(I)神经影像学包括计算机断层扫描(CT)、CT 血管造影(CTA)、磁共振成像(MRI)、磁共振血管造影(MRA)和超声(US);(C)MRI/临床标准;和(O)中枢性病因(中风、出血、肿瘤等)与症状的周围性病因。文章由两人独立评估。遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南。使用推荐评估、制定和评价(GRADE)对汇总估计的证据确定性进行评估。

结果

我们纳入了报告诊断准确性的研究。从 6309 个标题中,检索到 460 篇文章,其中 12 篇被纳入:非对比 CT 扫描-6 项研究,771 例患者,汇总敏感性 28.5%(95%CI 14.4%-48.5%,中等确定性)和特异性 98.9%(95%CI 93.4%-99.8%,中等确定性);MRI-5 项研究,943 例患者,敏感性 79.8%(95%CI 71.4%-86.2%,高确定性)和特异性 98.8%(95%CI 96.2%-100%,高确定性);CTA-1 项研究,153 例患者,敏感性 14.3%(95%CI 1.8%-42.8%)和特异性 97.7%(95%CI 93.8%-99.6%),CT 对中枢性病因的敏感性高于 CTA(21.4%和 14.3%);MRA-1 项研究,24 例患者,敏感性 60.0%(95%CI 26.2%-87.8%)和特异性 92.9%(95%CI 66.1%-99.8%);US-3 项研究,258 例患者,敏感性范围为 30%-53.6%,特异性范围为 94.9%-100%。

结论

非对比 CT 的敏感性非常低,如果在症状发作后早期进行影像学检查,MRI 将错过大约五分之一的中风患者。证据不支持神经影像学作为 ED 出现急性头晕或眩晕患者排除中风和其他中枢性病因的唯一工具。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验