Diagnostic Accuracy of MRI for Detecting Nerve Injury in Brachial Plexus Birth Injury.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
James Brooks, Claire Hardie, Ryckie Wade, Irvin Teh, Grainne Bourke
{"title":"Diagnostic Accuracy of MRI for Detecting Nerve Injury in Brachial Plexus Birth Injury.","authors":"James Brooks, Claire Hardie, Ryckie Wade, Irvin Teh, Grainne Bourke","doi":"10.1093/bjr/tqae214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for diagnosing nerve injury in brachial plexus birth injury (BPBI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases were searched from inception to 15th February 2023 for studies reporting the accuracy of MRI (index test) compared to surgical exploration (reference standard) in detecting the target conditions of: root avulsion; any nerve abnormality; and pseudomeningocele (as a marker of root avulsion) in children with BPBI. Meta-analysis using a bivariate model was performed where data allowed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>8 studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, 116 children with BPBI were included. All included studies were at risk of bias. The mean sensitivity and mean specificity of MRI for detecting root avulsion was 68% (95% CI: 55%, 79%) and 89% (95% CI: 78%, 95%) respectively. Pseudomeningocele was not a reliable marker of avulsion. Data was too sparse to determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for any nerve abnormality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>At present, surgical exploration should remain as the diagnostic modality of choice for BPBI due to the modest diagnostic accuracy of MRI in detecting root avulsion. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI needs to be close to 100% as the results may determine whether a child undergoes invasive surgery.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>Previous research regarding MRI in detecting BPBI is highly variable and prior to our study the overall diagnostic accuracy was unclear. Through conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis, we were able to reliably determine the overall sensitivity and specificity of MRI for detecting root avulsion.</p>","PeriodicalId":9306,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqae214","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for diagnosing nerve injury in brachial plexus birth injury (BPBI).

Methods: Electronic databases were searched from inception to 15th February 2023 for studies reporting the accuracy of MRI (index test) compared to surgical exploration (reference standard) in detecting the target conditions of: root avulsion; any nerve abnormality; and pseudomeningocele (as a marker of root avulsion) in children with BPBI. Meta-analysis using a bivariate model was performed where data allowed.

Results: 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, 116 children with BPBI were included. All included studies were at risk of bias. The mean sensitivity and mean specificity of MRI for detecting root avulsion was 68% (95% CI: 55%, 79%) and 89% (95% CI: 78%, 95%) respectively. Pseudomeningocele was not a reliable marker of avulsion. Data was too sparse to determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for any nerve abnormality.

Conclusions: At present, surgical exploration should remain as the diagnostic modality of choice for BPBI due to the modest diagnostic accuracy of MRI in detecting root avulsion. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI needs to be close to 100% as the results may determine whether a child undergoes invasive surgery.

Advances in knowledge: Previous research regarding MRI in detecting BPBI is highly variable and prior to our study the overall diagnostic accuracy was unclear. Through conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis, we were able to reliably determine the overall sensitivity and specificity of MRI for detecting root avulsion.

磁共振成像检测臂丛神经产伤中神经损伤的诊断准确性。
目的:确定核磁共振成像诊断臂丛神经产伤(BPBI)神经损伤的准确性:确定磁共振成像诊断臂丛神经产伤(BPBI)中神经损伤的准确性:方法: 在电子数据库中检索了从开始到2023年2月15日期间报告核磁共振成像(指标检测)与手术探查(参考标准)在检测BPBI患儿以下目标条件方面准确性的研究:神经根撕脱;任何神经异常;假性脑膜(作为神经根撕脱的标志)。在数据允许的情况下,采用双变量模型进行元分析:结果:8 项研究符合纳入标准。共有 116 名患有 BPBI 的儿童被纳入研究。所有纳入的研究均存在偏倚风险。磁共振成像检测牙根撕脱的平均灵敏度和平均特异度分别为68%(95% CI:55%,79%)和89%(95% CI:78%,95%)。假膜疝并不是牙根撕脱的可靠标志。数据太少,无法确定磁共振成像对任何神经异常的诊断准确性:结论:目前,由于磁共振成像在检测神经根撕脱方面的诊断准确性不高,手术探查仍应作为 BPBI 的首选诊断方式。磁共振成像的诊断准确率需要接近100%,因为其结果可能决定患儿是否接受侵入性手术:以往关于核磁共振成像检测 BPBI 的研究差异很大,在我们的研究之前,总体诊断准确性尚不明确。通过系统回顾和荟萃分析,我们能够可靠地确定核磁共振成像检测牙根撕脱的总体灵敏度和特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Radiology
British Journal of Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
330
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: BJR is the international research journal of the British Institute of Radiology and is the oldest scientific journal in the field of radiology and related sciences. Dating back to 1896, BJR’s history is radiology’s history, and the journal has featured some landmark papers such as the first description of Computed Tomography "Computerized transverse axial tomography" by Godfrey Hounsfield in 1973. A valuable historical resource, the complete BJR archive has been digitized from 1896. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor – 1.840 - Receipt to first decision – average of 6 weeks - Acceptance to online publication – average of 3 weeks - ISSN: 0007-1285 - eISSN: 1748-880X Open Access option
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信