Transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for the detection of patent foramen ovale in patients with cryptogenic cerebral ischemia: A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 625-635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aristeidis H. Katsanos ◽  
Theodora Psaltopoulou ◽  
Theodoros N. Sergentanis ◽  
Alexandra Frogoudaki ◽  
Agathi-Rosa Vrettou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cerebral Ischemia ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Transcranial Doppler ◽  
Transthoracic Echocardiography ◽  
Patent Foramen Ovale ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Foramen Ovale

Abstract 204: Transcranial Doppler Versus Transthoracic Echocardiography for the Detection of Patent Foramen Ovale in Patients With Cryptogenic Cerebral Ischemia: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Accuracy Meta-analysis

Stroke ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgios Tsivgoulis ◽  
Aristeidis H Katsanos ◽  
Theodora Psaltopoulou ◽  
Theodoros Sergentanis ◽  
Alexandra Frogoudaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cerebral Ischemia ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Transcranial Doppler ◽  
Transthoracic Echocardiography ◽  
Patent Foramen Ovale ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Receiver Operating Curve ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Foramen Ovale

Background & Purpose: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) can be detected in up to 43% of patients with cryptogenic cerebral ischemia undergoing investigation with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). The diagnostic value of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in the detection of PFO in patients with cryptogenic cerebral ischemia has not been compared with that of transcranial Doppler (TCD) using a comprehensive meta-analytical approach. Methods: We performed a systematic literature review according to PRISMA guidelines to identify all prospective observational studies of patients with cryptogenic cerebral ischemia that provided both sensitivity and specificity measures of TTE, TCD or both compared to the gold standard of TEE. Results: Our literature search identified 35 eligible studies including 3067 patients. The summary sensitivity and specificity for TCD was 96.1% (95% confidence interval: 93.0%-97.8%) and 92.4% (95%CI: 85.5%-96.1%), whereas the respective measures for TTE were 45.1% (95%CI: 30.8-60.3%) and 99.6% (95%CI: 96.5-99.9%). The summary diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for TCD (DOR=297.97, 95%CI: 131.18-676.83) and TTE (DOR=193.44, 95%CI: 30.38-1231.67) did not significantly differ (z-value=0.418, p=0.676). TTE was superior in terms of higher positive likelihood ratio values (LR+= 106.61, 95%CI: 15.09-753.30 for TTE vs. LR+=12.62, 95%CI: 6.52-24.43 for TCD; p=0.043), while TCD yielded lower negative positive likelihood values (LR- = 0.04, 95%CI: 0.02-0.08) compared to TTE (LR- =0.55, 95%CI: 0.42-0.72; p<0.001). Finally, the area under the summary receiver operating curve was significantly greater (p<0.001) in TCD (AUC=0.98, 95%CI: 0.97-0.99; Figure A) compared to TTE studies (AUC=0.86, 95%CI: 0.82-0.89; Figure B). Conclusions: TCD is more sensitive but less specific compared to TTE for the detection of PFO in patients with cryptogenic cerebral ischemia. The overall diagnostic yield of TCD appears to outweigh that of TTE.

We need to do better: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy of restless legs syndrome screening instruments

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 ◽  
pp. 101461
Author(s):  
Stephany Fulda ◽  
Richard P. Allen ◽  
Christopher J. Earley ◽  
Birgit Högl ◽  
Diego Garcia-Borreguero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Restless Legs Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Screening Instruments ◽  
Restless Legs

scholarly journals The diagnostic accuracy of isothermal nucleic acid point-of-care tests for human coronaviruses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pakpoom Subsoontorn ◽  
Manupat Lohitnavy ◽  
Chuenjid Kongkaew
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Isothermal Amplification ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Index Test ◽  
Point Of Care Tests

AbstractMany recent studies reported coronavirus point-of-care tests (POCTs) based on isothermal amplification. However, the performances of these tests have not been systematically evaluated. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy was used as a guideline for conducting this systematic review. We searched peer-reviewed and preprint articles in PubMed, BioRxiv and MedRxiv up to 28 September 2020 to identify studies that provide data to calculate sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) was applied for assessing quality of included studies and Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) was followed for reporting. We included 81 studies from 65 research articles on POCTs of SARS, MERS and COVID-19. Most studies had high risk of patient selection and index test bias but low risk in other domains. Diagnostic specificities were high (> 0.95) for included studies while sensitivities varied depending on type of assays and sample used. Most studies (n = 51) used reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) to diagnose coronaviruses. RT-LAMP of RNA purified from COVID-19 patient samples had pooled sensitivity at 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.96). RT-LAMP of crude samples had substantially lower sensitivity at 0.78 (95% CI: 0.65–0.87). Abbott ID Now performance was similar to RT-LAMP of crude samples. Diagnostic performances by CRISPR and RT-LAMP on purified RNA were similar. Other diagnostic platforms including RT- recombinase assisted amplification (RT-RAA) and SAMBA-II also offered high sensitivity (> 0.95). Future studies should focus on the use of un-bias patient cohorts, double-blinded index test and detection assays that do not require RNA extraction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document