Miguel Felipe González Trasviña, U. C. Díaz, Saúl Antonio Villagrana Márquez
{"title":"对比多普勒超声诊断从右到左短路:系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Miguel Felipe González Trasviña, U. C. Díaz, Saúl Antonio Villagrana Márquez","doi":"10.35366/94898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transcranial UD-c was reported in 34 studies, including 2,964 participants (average age 46.8 years, 52% male); for the set of studies, a sensitivity of 95% (95% CI of 0.93-0.97) and specificity of 95% (95% CI of 0.89-0.98) were calculated; likelihood ratio (+) of 8.93 (95% CI of 7.17-11.0), and a Likelihood ratio (-) of 0.08 (95% CI of 0.05-0.12) were also calculated, and when making Bayes’ nomogram, inferring a probability Pre-Test of 30% (prevalence of CDI in general population), a post-test probability is calculated for their respective Likelihood ratio (+) of 79% (CI 0.75-0.82), and a post-test probability for their respective likelihood (-) of 3% (CI 0.02-0.05). Conclusions: The transcranial UD-c is a test with an excellent diagnostic performance when compared to ETE-c, it has the disadvantage of not allowing to differentiate the type of communication (intracardiac or pulmonary). There is not enough evidence to recommend the use of vertebral or carotid UD-c for the diagnosis of CDI; however, current evidence points to a superiority of transcranial UD-c over these. ABSTRACT Introduction: Right to left","PeriodicalId":344697,"journal":{"name":"Medicina Crítica","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasonido Doppler con contraste para el diagnóstico de cortocircuito de derecha a izquierda: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Felipe González Trasviña, U. C. Díaz, Saúl Antonio Villagrana Márquez\",\"doi\":\"10.35366/94898\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Transcranial UD-c was reported in 34 studies, including 2,964 participants (average age 46.8 years, 52% male); for the set of studies, a sensitivity of 95% (95% CI of 0.93-0.97) and specificity of 95% (95% CI of 0.89-0.98) were calculated; likelihood ratio (+) of 8.93 (95% CI of 7.17-11.0), and a Likelihood ratio (-) of 0.08 (95% CI of 0.05-0.12) were also calculated, and when making Bayes’ nomogram, inferring a probability Pre-Test of 30% (prevalence of CDI in general population), a post-test probability is calculated for their respective Likelihood ratio (+) of 79% (CI 0.75-0.82), and a post-test probability for their respective likelihood (-) of 3% (CI 0.02-0.05). Conclusions: The transcranial UD-c is a test with an excellent diagnostic performance when compared to ETE-c, it has the disadvantage of not allowing to differentiate the type of communication (intracardiac or pulmonary). There is not enough evidence to recommend the use of vertebral or carotid UD-c for the diagnosis of CDI; however, current evidence points to a superiority of transcranial UD-c over these. ABSTRACT Introduction: Right to left\",\"PeriodicalId\":344697,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicina Crítica\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicina Crítica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35366/94898\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina Crítica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35366/94898","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Ultrasonido Doppler con contraste para el diagnóstico de cortocircuito de derecha a izquierda: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis
Transcranial UD-c was reported in 34 studies, including 2,964 participants (average age 46.8 years, 52% male); for the set of studies, a sensitivity of 95% (95% CI of 0.93-0.97) and specificity of 95% (95% CI of 0.89-0.98) were calculated; likelihood ratio (+) of 8.93 (95% CI of 7.17-11.0), and a Likelihood ratio (-) of 0.08 (95% CI of 0.05-0.12) were also calculated, and when making Bayes’ nomogram, inferring a probability Pre-Test of 30% (prevalence of CDI in general population), a post-test probability is calculated for their respective Likelihood ratio (+) of 79% (CI 0.75-0.82), and a post-test probability for their respective likelihood (-) of 3% (CI 0.02-0.05). Conclusions: The transcranial UD-c is a test with an excellent diagnostic performance when compared to ETE-c, it has the disadvantage of not allowing to differentiate the type of communication (intracardiac or pulmonary). There is not enough evidence to recommend the use of vertebral or carotid UD-c for the diagnosis of CDI; however, current evidence points to a superiority of transcranial UD-c over these. ABSTRACT Introduction: Right to left