A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care tests used to establish the presence of peripheral arterial disease in people with diabetes

Author(s):  
Pasha Normahani ◽  
Chira Mustafa ◽  
Joseph Shalhoub ◽  
Alun H. Davies ◽  
John Norrie ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pakpoom Subsoontorn ◽  
Manupat Lohitnavy ◽  
Chuenjid Kongkaew

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 315 ◽  
pp. 81-92
Author(s):  
Ángel Herraiz-Adillo ◽  
Iván Cavero-Redondo ◽  
Celia Álvarez-Bueno ◽  
Diana P. Pozuelo-Carrascosa ◽  
Montserrat Solera-Martínez

Heart ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 100 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meghan Sebastianski ◽  
Mark J Makowsky ◽  
Marlene Dorgan ◽  
Ross T Tsuyuki

2017 ◽  
Vol 71 (9) ◽  
pp. e12994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ángel Herráiz-Adillo ◽  
Iván Cavero-Redondo ◽  
Celia Álvarez-Bueno ◽  
Vicente Martínez-Vizcaíno ◽  
Diana P. Pozuelo-Carrascosa ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 130 ◽  
pp. 18-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elise H. Tatone ◽  
Jessica L. Gordon ◽  
Jessie Hubbs ◽  
Stephen J. LeBlanc ◽  
Trevor J. DeVries ◽  
...  

VASA ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatriz Gavier ◽  
Fernando Vazquez ◽  
Esteban Gandara

Abstract. Background: Despite being an important risk factor for venous thromboembolism and ischaemic stroke, the role of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with peripheral arterial disease remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of persistently elevated antiphospholipid antibodies and lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases including MEDLINE, EUROPUBMED and EMBASE to assess the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. Case-control studies were included if they reported the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. Two reviewers (FV and EG) independently assessed the eligibility of all articles. The primary outcome measure was the odds ratio (OR) for the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease, along with the corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Our initial electronic search identified 128 relevant abstracts, of which two studies were included. Antiphospholipid antibodies were found in 50/571 patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease and 13/490 of the controls, OR 3.32 (95 % CI = 1.49 to 7.4). In those with critical limb ischaemia, the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies was elevated compared to controls, pooled OR 4.78 (95 % CI = 2.37 to 9.65). Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that the prevalence of persistently elevated levels of antiphospholipid antibodies is increased in patients with lower extremity peripheral diseases when compared to healthy controls, especially in those with critical limb ischaemia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document