scholarly journals Accuracy of Anti-GBM Antibodies in Diagnosing Anti-Glomerular Basement Membrane Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Akihiro Shiroshita ◽  
Yasuhiro Oda ◽  
Seiji Takenouchi ◽  
Noboru Hagino ◽  
Yuki Kataoka

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The sensitivity and specificity of anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antibodies have not been systematically analyzed. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anti-GBM antibodies for anti-GBM disease. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> Potential studies were searched using MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform based on the index test and target condition. The inclusion criteria were prospective or retrospective cohort studies or case-control studies assessing the sensitivity and specificity of anti-GBM antibodies, and the reference standard was clinical diagnosis including biopsy results. The exclusion criteria were review articles, case reports, animal studies, and in vitro studies. Quality assessment was conducted based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. The overall quality was evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Six studies (1,691 patients) and 11 index tests were included in our systematic review. A high risk of bias and concerns regarding the applicability of patient selection were noted because of the case-control design in 67% of the included studies. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93% (95% CI: 84–97%) and 97% (95% CI: 94–99%), respectively. The certainty of evidence was low because of the high risk of bias and indirectness. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> Anti-GBM antibodies may exhibit high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of anti-GBM disease. Further cohort studies are needed to confirm their precise diagnostic accuracy and compare diagnostic accuracies among different immunoassays.

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Phang Romero Casas ◽  
Marrissa Martyn-St James ◽  
Jean Hamilton ◽  
Daniel S Marinho ◽  
Rodolfo Castro ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the test performance including sensitivity and specificity of rapid immunochromatographic syphilis (ICS) point-of-care (POC) tests at antenatal clinics compared with reference standard tests (non-treponemal (TP) and TP tests) for active syphilis in pregnant women.MethodsFive electronic databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CRD, Cochrane Library and LILACS) to March 2016 for diagnostic accuracy studies of ICS test and standard reference tests for syphilis in pregnant women. Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). A bivariate meta-analysis was undertaken to generate pooled estimates of diagnostic parameters. Results were presented using a coupled forest plot of sensitivity and specificity and a scatter plot.ResultsThe methodological quality of the five included studies with regards to risk of bias and applicability concern judgements was either low or unclear. One study was judged as high risk of bias for patient selection due to exclusion of pregnant women with a previous history of syphilis, and one study was judged at high risk of bias for study flow and timing as not all patients were included in the analysis. Five studies contributed to the meta-analysis, providing a pooled sensitivity and specificity for ICS of 0.85 (95% CrI: 0.73 to 0.92) and 0.98 (95% CrI: 0.95 to 0.99), respectively.ConclusionsThis review and meta-analysis observed that rapid ICS POC tests have a high sensitivity and specificity when performed in pregnant women at antenatal clinics. However, the methodological quality of the existing evidence base should be taken into consideration when interpreting these results.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016036335.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e050108
Author(s):  
Hester Beatrice Emilie Elzinga ◽  
Hanneke Doremiek van Oorschot ◽  
Inge Stegeman ◽  
Adriana L Smit

ObjectivesThis systematic review summarises the evidence on the correlation between recurrent acute otitis media (rAOM) or chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) and sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL).Research methodsPubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to 15 January 2021. Two authors independently identified articles, extracted data and performed quality assessment for included studies. Studies comparing the sensorineural hearing levels of patients with a history of rAOM/CSOM for >3 months to a control group were included.ResultsScreening of 4168 articles lead to inclusion of two case-control studies (control-group: patients non-OM) and seven cohort-studies (control group: contralateral ear). Quality assessment indicated considerable risk of bias in all studies. Reported populations varied (sample size 13–607, mean age 22–41.5 years, mean duration of disease 6.1–12.4 years). The OR for SNHL in the OM-group was 3.30–7.86 (95% CI 1.16 to 9.40, p<0.05) in cohort studies (n=2), and 0.05 (95% CI 0 to 0.78, p<0.05) in a case-control study. Mean/median bone conduction thresholds were respectively 1.19–32.21/0–10 dB higher on all frequencies (0.5–4 kHz) for the OM-group in four cohort studies (p<0.05). Two other studies reported no statistical test outcomes.ConclusionDue to the high risk of bias of included studies, effect estimates heterogeneity and suboptimal research designs, no conclusion on the correlation between OM and SNHL can be made. It emphasises the need for future prognostic studies.


BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m2516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayara Lisboa Bastos ◽  
Gamuchirai Tavaziva ◽  
Syed Kunal Abidi ◽  
Jonathon R Campbell ◽  
Louis-Patrick Haraoui ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (covid-19).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, bioRxiv, and medRxiv from 1 January to 30 April 2020, using subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of covid-19 and serological tests for covid-19.Eligibility criteria and data analysisEligible studies measured sensitivity or specificity, or both of a covid-19 serological test compared with a reference standard of viral culture or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Studies were excluded with fewer than five participants or samples. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random effects bivariate meta-analyses.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity, stratified by method of serological testing (enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), or chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs)) and immunoglobulin class (IgG, IgM, or both). Secondary outcomes were stratum specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by study or participant characteristics, including time since symptom onset.Results5016 references were identified and 40 studies included. 49 risk of bias assessments were carried out (one for each population and method evaluated). High risk of patient selection bias was found in 98% (48/49) of assessments and high or unclear risk of bias from performance or interpretation of the serological test in 73% (36/49). Only 10% (4/40) of studies included outpatients. Only two studies evaluated tests at the point of care. For each method of testing, pooled sensitivity and specificity were not associated with the immunoglobulin class measured. The pooled sensitivity of ELISAs measuring IgG or IgM was 84.3% (95% confidence interval 75.6% to 90.9%), of LFIAs was 66.0% (49.3% to 79.3%), and of CLIAs was 97.8% (46.2% to 100%). In all analyses, pooled sensitivity was lower for LFIAs, the potential point-of-care method. Pooled specificities ranged from 96.6% to 99.7%. Of the samples used for estimating specificity, 83% (10 465/12 547) were from populations tested before the epidemic or not suspected of having covid-19. Among LFIAs, pooled sensitivity of commercial kits (65.0%, 49.0% to 78.2%) was lower than that of non-commercial tests (88.2%, 83.6% to 91.3%). Heterogeneity was seen in all analyses. Sensitivity was higher at least three weeks after symptom onset (ranging from 69.9% to 98.9%) compared with within the first week (from 13.4% to 50.3%).ConclusionHigher quality clinical studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19 are urgently needed. Currently, available evidence does not support the continued use of existing point-of-care serological tests.Study registrationPROSPERO CRD42020179452.


Author(s):  
Sneha Sethi ◽  
Xiangqun Ju ◽  
Richard M. Logan ◽  
Paul Sambrook ◽  
Robert A. McLaughlin ◽  
...  

Background: Advances in treatment approaches for patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) have been unsuccessful in preventing frequent recurrences and distant metastases, leading to a poor prognosis. Early detection and prevention enable an improved 5-year survival and better prognosis. Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (CLE) is a non-invasive imaging instrument that could enable an earlier diagnosis and possibly help in reducing unnecessary invasive surgical procedures. Objective: To present an up to date systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CLE in diagnosing OSCC. Materials and Methods. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were explored up to 30 June 2021, to collect articles concerning the diagnosis of OSCC through CLE. Screening: data extraction and appraisal was done by two reviewers. The quality of the methodology followed by the studies included in this review was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. A random effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Results: Six studies were included, leading to a total number of 361 lesions in 213 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI, 92–97%; I2 = 77.5%) and 93% (95% CI, 90–95%; I2 = 68.6%); the pooled positive likelihood ratios and negative likelihood ratios were 10.85 (95% CI, 5.4–21.7; I2 = 55.9%) and 0.08 (95% CI, 0.03–0.2; I2 = 83.5%); and the pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 174.45 (95% CI, 34.51–881.69; I2 = 73.6%). Although risk of bias and heterogeneity is observed, this study validates that CLE may have a noteworthy clinical influence on the diagnosis of OSCC, through its high sensitivity and specificity. Conclusions: This review indicates an exceptionally high sensitivity and specificity of CLE for diagnosing OSCC. Whilst it is a promising diagnostic instrument, the limited number of existing studies and potential risk of bias of included studies does not allow us to draw firm conclusions. A conclusive inference can be drawn when more studies, possibly with homogeneous methodological approach, are performed.


Author(s):  
Melina Michelen ◽  
Lakshmi Manoharan ◽  
Natalie Elkheir ◽  
Vincent Cheng ◽  
Drew Dagens ◽  
...  

Objective To understand the frequency, profile, and duration of persistent symptoms of covid-19 and to update this understanding as new evidence emerges. Design: A living systematic review produced in response to the rapidly evolving evidence base for long covid. Data sources Medline and CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (Ovid), WHO Global Research Database on covid-19, LitCOVID, and Google Scholar to 28th September 2020. Study selection Studies reporting long-term symptoms and complications among people with confirmed or suspected covid-19, both in those previously hospitalised and those never hospitalised. Only studies incorporating over 100 participants qualified for data extraction and were assessed for risk of bias. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics. Quality assessment Risk of bias was assessed using a quality assessment checklist for prevalence studies. Results Twenty-eight studies qualified for data extraction; 16 of these were cohort studies, ten cross-sectional, and two large case series. The analysis included 9,442 adults with covid-19 from 13 countries. The longest mean follow-up period was 111 (SD: 11) days post-hospital discharge. A wide range of systemic, cardiopulmonary, gastrointestinal, neurological, and psychosocial symptoms was reported, of which the most common were breathlessness, fatigue, smell and taste disturbance, and anxiety. Persistent symptoms were described across both previously hospitalised and non-hospitalised populations. The quality of evidence was low, with a high risk of bias and heterogeneity in prevalence. The incorporated studies demonstrated limited external validity, a lack of control subjects, and inconsistent data collection methods. Few studies were conducted in primary care, no studies focused solely on children, and no studies were set in low- and middle-income countries. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that long covid is a complex, heterogeneous condition; however, the limited evidence base currently precludes a precise definition of its symptoms and prevalence. There is a clear need for robust, controlled, prospective cohort studies, including different at-risk populations and settings, incorporating appropriate investigations, collected and recorded in a standardised way.


2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 629-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene J Tan ◽  
Lucy P Dobson ◽  
Stephen Bartnik ◽  
Josephine Muir ◽  
Angus W Turner

Introduction Advances in imaging capabilities and the evolution of real-time teleophthalmology have the potential to provide increased coverage to areas with limited ophthalmology services. However, there is limited research assessing the diagnostic accuracy of face-to-face teleophthalmology consultation. This systematic review aims to determine if real-time teleophthalmology provides comparable accuracy to face-to-face consultation for the diagnosis of common eye health conditions. Methods A search of PubMed, Embase, Medline and Cochrane databases and manual citation review was conducted on 6 February and 7 April 2016. Included studies involved real-time telemedicine in the field of ophthalmology or optometry, and assessed diagnostic accuracy against gold-standard face-to-face consultation. The revised quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2) tool assessed risk of bias. Results Twelve studies were included, with participants ranging from four to 89 years old. A broad number of conditions were assessed and include corneal and retinal pathologies, strabismus, oculoplastics and post-operative review. Quality assessment identified a high or unclear risk of bias in patient selection (75%) due to an undisclosed recruitment processes. The index test showed high risk of bias in the included studies, due to the varied interpretation and conduct of real-time teleophthalmology methods. Reference standard risk was overall low (75%), as was the risk due to flow and timing (75%). Conclusion In terms of diagnostic accuracy, real-time teleophthalmology was considered superior to face-to-face consultation in one study and comparable in six studies. Store-and-forward image transmission coupled with real-time videoconferencing is a suitable alternative to overcome poor internet transmission speeds.


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 6047
Author(s):  
Denisse Champin ◽  
Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto ◽  
Javier Vargas-Herrera

Little is known regarding the usefulness of the smartphone in the detection of uterine cervical lesions or uterine cervical cancer. Therefore, we evaluated the usefulness of the smartphone in the detection of uterine cervical lesions and measured its diagnostic accuracy by comparing its findings with histological findings. We conducted a systematic review to identify studies on the usefulness of the smartphone in detecting uterine cervical lesions indexed in SCOPUS, MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, OVID, Web of Science, and SciELO until November 2020. The risk of bias and applicability was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. A total of 16 studies that evaluated the usefulness of the smartphone in the detection of uterine cervical lesions based on the images clicked after visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), Lugol’s iodine (VILI), or VIA/VILI combination were included in the study. Five studies estimated diagnostic sensitivity and specificity, nine described diagnostic concordance, and five described the usefulness of mobile technology. Among the five first studies, the sensitivity ranged between 66.7% (95% confidence interval (CI); 30.0–90.3%) and 94.1% (95% CI; 81.6–98.3%), and the specificity ranged between 24.0% (95% CI; 9.0–45.0%) and 85.7% (95% CI; 76.7–91.6%). The risk of bias was low (20%), and the applicability was high. In conclusion, the smartphone images clicked after a VIA were found to be more sensitive than those following the VILI method or the VIA/VILI combination and naked-eye techniques in detecting uterine cervical lesions. Thus, a smartphone may be useful in the detection of uterine cervical lesions; however, its sensitivity and specificity are still limited.


Thorax ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. thoraxjnl-2021-216838
Author(s):  
Casper Falster ◽  
Niels Jacobsen ◽  
Karen Ehlers Coman ◽  
Mikkel Højlund ◽  
Thomas Agerbo Gaist ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound in suspected pulmonary embolism.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane library were searched on 2 July 2020 with no restrictions on the date of publication. Subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of pulmonary embolism, ultrasound and diagnosis were used.Eligibility criteria and data analysisEligible studies reported sensitivity and specificity of deep venous, lung, cardiac or multiorgan ultrasound in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism, using an adequate reference-test. Prospective, cross-sectional and retrospective studies were considered for eligibility. No restrictions were made on language. Studies were excluded if a control group consisted of healthy volunteers or if transesophageal or endobronchial ultrasound was used. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2. Meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity was performed by construction of hierarchical summary receiver operator curves. I2 was used to assess the study heterogeneity.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity of reported ultrasound signs, stratified by organ approach (deep venous, lung, cardiac and multiorgan). Secondary outcomes were stratum-specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by pretest probability of pulmonary embolism.Results6378 references were identified, and 70 studies included. The study population comprised 9664 patients with a prevalence of pulmonary embolism of 39.9% (3852/9664). Risk of bias in at least one domain was found in 98.6% (69/70) of included studies. Most frequently, 72.8% (51/70) of studies reported >24 hours between ultrasound examination and reference test or did not disclose time interval at all. Level of heterogeneity ranged from 0% to 100%. Most notable ultrasound signs were bilateral compression of femoral and popliteal veins (22 studies; 4708 patients; sensitivity 43.7% (36.3% to 51.4%); specificity 96.7% (95.4% to 97.6%)), presence of at least one hypoechoic pleural-based lesion (19 studies; 2134 patients; sensitivity 81.4% (73.2% to 87.5%); specificity 87.4% (80.9% to 91.9%)), D-sign (13 studies; 1579 patients; sensitivity 29.7% (24.6% to 35.4%); specificity 96.2% (93.1% to 98.0%)), visible right ventricular thrombus (5 studies; 995 patients; sensitivity 4.7% (2.7% to 8.1%); specificity 100% (99.0% to 100%)) and McConnell’s sign (11 studies; 1480 patients; sensitivity 29.1% (20.0% to 40.1%); specificity 98.6% (96.7% to 99.4%)).ConclusionSeveral ultrasound signs exhibit a high specificity for pulmonary embolism, suggesting that implementation of ultrasound in the initial assessment of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism may improve the selection of patients for radiation imaging.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184313.


2020 ◽  
pp. emermed-2019-208547
Author(s):  
Alessandro Squizzato ◽  
Lorenzo Maroni ◽  
Cristina Marrazzo ◽  
Nicoletta Riva ◽  
Luigina Guasti

BackgroundDyspnoea is the most common sign of heart failure (HF). Patients accessing the ED for HF-related symptoms require fast diagnosis and early treatment. Transthoracic echocardiography has a crucial role in HF diagnosis, but requires qualified staff and adequate time for execution. The measurement of inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter has been recently proposed as a rapid, simple and reliable marker of volume overload. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the accuracy of IVC-ultrasound as a stand-alone test for HF diagnosis in patients presenting to the ED with acute dyspnoea.MethodsStudies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of the inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC-CIx) for HF diagnosis were systematically searched in the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases (up to January 2018). Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool was used for the quality assessment of the primary studies. A bivariate random-effects regression approach was used for summary estimates of both sensitivity and specificity.ResultsSeven studies, for a total of 591 patients, were included. Three studies were at low-risk of bias. All studies used a proper reference test. Weighted mean prevalence of HF was 49.3% at random-effect model (I2 index for heterogeneity=74.7%). IVC-CIx bivariate weighted mean sensitivity was 79.1% (95% CI 68.5% to 86.8%) and bivariate weighted mean specificity was 81.8% (95% CI 75.0% to 87.0%).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the sensitivity and specificity of IVC-CIx are suboptimal to rule in or rule out HF diagnosis in patients with acute dyspnoea in the ED setting. Therefore, IVC-CIx is not advisable as a stand-alone test, but may be useful when integrated in a specific diagnostic algorithm for the differential diagnosis of acute dyspnoea.


Critical Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akira Kuriyama ◽  
Jeffrey L. Jackson ◽  
Jun Kamei

Abstract Background Clinical practice guidelines recommend performing a cuff leak test in mechanically ventilated adults who meet extubation criteria to screen those at high risk for post-extubation stridor. Previous systematic reviews demonstrated excellent specificity of the cuff leak test but disagreed with respect to sensitivity. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the cuff leak test for predicting post-extubation airway complications in intubated adult patients in critical care settings. Methods We searched Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Library for eligible studies from inception to March 16, 2020, without language restrictions. We included studies that examined the diagnostic accuracy of cuff leak test if post-extubation airway obstruction after extubation or reintubation was explicitly reported as the reference standard. Two authors in duplicate and independently assessed the risk of bias using the Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. We pooled sensitivities and specificities using generalized linear mixed model approach to bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Our primary outcomes were post-extubation airway obstruction and reintubation. Results We included 28 studies involving 4493 extubations. Three studies were at low risk for all QUADAS-2 risk of bias domains. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of cuff leak test for post-extubation airway obstruction were 0.62 (95% CI 0.49–0.73; I2 = 81.6%) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.82–0.90; I2 = 97.8%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the cuff leak test for reintubation were 0.66 (95% CI 0.46–0.81; I2 = 48.9%) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.83–0.92; I2 = 87.4%), respectively. Subgroup analyses suggested that the type of cuff leak test and length of intubation might be the cause of statistical heterogeneity of sensitivity and specificity, respectively, for post-extubation airway obstruction. Conclusions The cuff leak test has excellent specificity but moderate sensitivity for post-extubation airway obstruction. The high specificity suggests that clinicians should consider intervening in patients with a positive test, but the low sensitivity suggests that patients still need to be closely monitored post-extubation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document