Suppr超能文献

快速侧向流动免疫分析在人钩端螺旋体病诊断中的准确性:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Accuracy of rapid lateral flow immunoassays for human leptospirosis diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand.

Drug Delivery System Excellence Center (DDSEC), Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand.

出版信息

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2024 May 15;18(5):e0012174. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012174. eCollection 2024 May.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In the last two decades, several rapid lateral flow immunoassays (LFIs) for the diagnosis of human leptospirosis were developed and commercialized. However, the accuracy and reliability of these LFIs are not well understood. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the accuracy of leptospirosis LFIs as well as the factors affecting the test efficiency using systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Original articles reporting the accuracy of human leptospirosis LFIs against microagglutination tests (MAT) or immunofluorescent assays (IFA) were searched from PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, and selected as per pre-set inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 49 data entries extracted from 24 eligible records published between 2003 and 2023 were included for meta-analysis. A meta-analysis was performed using STATA. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the revised QUADAS-2. Only nine studies (32.1%) were considered to have a low risk of bias and no concern for applicability. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated to be 68% (95% confidence interval, CI: 57-78) and 93% (95% CI: 90-95), respectively. However, the ranges of sensitivity (3.6 - 100%) and specificity (53.5 - 100%) of individual entries are dramatically broad, possibly due to the heterogeneity found in both study designs and LFIs themselves. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that IgM detection has better sensitivity than detection of IgG alone. Moreover, the test performance seems to be unaffected by samples from different phases of infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The pooled specificity of LFIs observed is somewhat acceptable, but the pooled sensitivity is low. These results, however, must be interpreted with caution because of substantial heterogeneity. Further evaluations of the LFIs with well-standardized design and reference test will be needed for a greater understanding of the test performance. Additionally, IgM detection type should be employed when leptospirosis LFIs are developed in the future.

摘要

背景

在过去的二十年中,已经开发并商业化了几种用于诊断人类钩端螺旋体病的快速侧向流动免疫分析(LFI)。然而,这些 LFIs 的准确性和可靠性还不太清楚。在这项研究中,我们旨在使用系统评价和荟萃分析来评估 LFI 检测人类钩端螺旋体病的准确性以及影响测试效率的因素。

方法和结果

从 PubMed、Embase 和 Scopus 中搜索了报告人类钩端螺旋体病 LFIs 对凝集试验(MAT)或免疫荧光试验(IFA)的准确性的原始文章,并根据预先设定的纳入和排除标准进行了选择。从 24 篇发表于 2003 年至 2023 年之间的合格记录中提取了 49 个数据条目进行荟萃分析。使用 STATA 进行荟萃分析。根据修订后的 QUADAS-2 评估纳入研究的质量。只有 9 项研究(32.1%)被认为具有低偏倚风险且无应用问题。计算合并敏感性和特异性分别为 68%(95%置信区间,CI:57-78)和 93%(95% CI:90-95)。然而,个别条目敏感性(3.6-100%)和特异性(53.5-100%)的范围非常广泛,这可能是由于研究设计和 LFIs 本身的异质性造成的。亚组分析表明,IgM 检测的敏感性优于单独检测 IgG。此外,测试性能似乎不受感染不同阶段的样本的影响。

结论

观察到的 LFIs 的合并特异性有些可以接受,但合并敏感性较低。然而,由于存在很大的异质性,必须谨慎解释这些结果。为了更好地了解测试性能,需要对具有标准化设计和参考测试的 LFIs 进行进一步评估。此外,在未来开发 LFIs 时,应该采用 IgM 检测类型。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a76d/11132494/4c7dd897ecb7/pntd.0012174.g001.jpg

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