Diagnostic accuracy of tests for tuberculous pericarditis: A network meta-analysis

Q3 Medicine
Alina Pervez , S. Umar Hasan , Mohammad Hamza , Sohaib Asghar , Muhammad Husnain Qaiser , Sana Zaidi , Isra Mustansar
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy of tests for tuberculous pericarditis: A network meta-analysis","authors":"Alina Pervez ,&nbsp;S. Umar Hasan ,&nbsp;Mohammad Hamza ,&nbsp;Sohaib Asghar ,&nbsp;Muhammad Husnain Qaiser ,&nbsp;Sana Zaidi ,&nbsp;Isra Mustansar","doi":"10.1016/j.ijtb.2023.05.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Tuberculous pericarditis (TBP) is a relatively uncommon but potentially fatal extrapulmonary manifestation of tuberculosis. Despite its severity, there is no universally accepted gold standard diagnostic test for TBP currently. The objective of this study is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the most commonly used tests in terms of specificity, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV), and provide a summary of their diagnostic accuracies. A comprehensive literature review was performed using Scopus, MEDLINE, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials, encompassing studies published from start to April 2022. Studies that compared </span>Interferon Gamma Release Assay<span><span> (IGRA), Xpert MTB/RIF, Adenosine Deaminase levels (ADA), and Smear Microscopy (SM) were included in the analysis. Bayesian random-effects model was used for statistical analysis and mean and standard deviation (SD) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the absolute risk (AR) and odds ratio (OR). Rank probability and heterogeneity were determined using risk difference and Cochran Q test, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated using true negative, true positive, false positive, and </span>false negative rates. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) was calculated for mean and standard error. A total of seven studies comprising 16 arms and 618 patients were included in the analysis. IGRA exhibited the highest mean (SD) sensitivity of 0.934 (0.049), with a high rank probability of 87.5% for being the best diagnostic test, and the AUROC was found to be 94.8 (0.36). On the other hand, SM demonstrated the highest mean (SD) specificity of 0.999 (0.011), with a rank probability of 99.5%, but a leave-one-out analysis excluding SM studies revealed that Xpert MTB/RIF ranked highest for specificity, with a mean (SD) of 0.962 (0.064). The diagnostic tests compared in our study exhibited similar high NPV, while ADA was found to have the lowest PPV among the evaluated methods. Further research, including comparative studies, should be conducted using a standardized cutoff value for both ADA levels and IGRA to mitigate the risk of threshold effect and minimize bias and heterogeneity in data analysis.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":39346,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Tuberculosis","volume":"71 2","pages":"Pages 185-194"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Tuberculosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019570723000999","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Tuberculous pericarditis (TBP) is a relatively uncommon but potentially fatal extrapulmonary manifestation of tuberculosis. Despite its severity, there is no universally accepted gold standard diagnostic test for TBP currently. The objective of this study is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the most commonly used tests in terms of specificity, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV), and provide a summary of their diagnostic accuracies. A comprehensive literature review was performed using Scopus, MEDLINE, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials, encompassing studies published from start to April 2022. Studies that compared Interferon Gamma Release Assay (IGRA), Xpert MTB/RIF, Adenosine Deaminase levels (ADA), and Smear Microscopy (SM) were included in the analysis. Bayesian random-effects model was used for statistical analysis and mean and standard deviation (SD) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the absolute risk (AR) and odds ratio (OR). Rank probability and heterogeneity were determined using risk difference and Cochran Q test, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated using true negative, true positive, false positive, and false negative rates. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) was calculated for mean and standard error. A total of seven studies comprising 16 arms and 618 patients were included in the analysis. IGRA exhibited the highest mean (SD) sensitivity of 0.934 (0.049), with a high rank probability of 87.5% for being the best diagnostic test, and the AUROC was found to be 94.8 (0.36). On the other hand, SM demonstrated the highest mean (SD) specificity of 0.999 (0.011), with a rank probability of 99.5%, but a leave-one-out analysis excluding SM studies revealed that Xpert MTB/RIF ranked highest for specificity, with a mean (SD) of 0.962 (0.064). The diagnostic tests compared in our study exhibited similar high NPV, while ADA was found to have the lowest PPV among the evaluated methods. Further research, including comparative studies, should be conducted using a standardized cutoff value for both ADA levels and IGRA to mitigate the risk of threshold effect and minimize bias and heterogeneity in data analysis.

结核性心包炎检测的诊断准确性:网络荟萃分析
结核性心包炎(TBP)是一种相对少见但可能致命的结核病肺外表现。尽管结核性心包炎十分严重,但目前还没有公认的诊断结核性心包炎的金标准检测方法。本研究旨在从特异性、灵敏度、阴性预测值(NPV)和阳性预测值(PPV)等方面比较最常用检测方法的诊断准确性,并对其诊断准确性进行总结。我们使用 Scopus、MEDLINE 和 Cochrane 对照试验中央登记册进行了全面的文献综述,包括从开始到 2022 年 4 月发表的研究。比较干扰素γ释放试验(IGRA)、Xpert MTB/RIF、腺苷脱氨酶水平(ADA)和涂片显微镜检查(SM)的研究均被纳入分析范围。统计分析采用贝叶斯随机效应模型,使用绝对风险(AR)和几率比(OR)计算平均值和标准差(SD)以及 95% 的置信区间。等级概率和异质性分别通过风险差异和 Cochran Q 检验来确定。使用真阴性率、真阳性率、假阳性率和假阴性率评估灵敏度和特异性。受试者操作特征下面积(AUROC)的计算采用平均值和标准误差。共有 7 项研究纳入分析,包括 16 个研究臂和 618 名患者。IGRA 的平均(标准差)灵敏度最高,为 0.934 (0.049),成为最佳诊断测试的概率高达 87.5%,AUROC 为 94.8 (0.36)。另一方面,SM 的特异性平均值(SD)最高,为 0.999 (0.011),排名概率为 99.5%,但在排除 SM 研究后进行的剔除分析显示,Xpert MTB/RIF 的特异性排名最高,平均值(SD)为 0.962 (0.064)。我们的研究中比较的诊断测试都表现出类似的高 NPV,而 ADA 的 PPV 在所有评估方法中最低。进一步的研究(包括比较研究)应使用 ADA 水平和 IGRA 的标准化临界值,以降低阈值效应的风险,并最大限度地减少数据分析中的偏差和异质性。
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
Indian Journal of Tuberculosis
Indian Journal of Tuberculosis Medicine-Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
103
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Tuberculosis (IJTB) is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to the specialty of tuberculosis and lung diseases and is published quarterly. IJTB publishes research on clinical, epidemiological, public health and social aspects of tuberculosis. The journal accepts original research articles, viewpoints, review articles, success stories, interesting case series and case reports on patients suffering from pulmonary, extra-pulmonary tuberculosis as well as other respiratory diseases, Radiology Forum, Short Communications, Book Reviews, abstracts, letters to the editor, editorials on topics of current interest etc. The articles published in IJTB are a key source of information on research in tuberculosis. The journal is indexed in Medline
×
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