计算机断层扫描与磁共振成像在急诊科头晕评估中的诊断准确性比较:系统回顾

Ishfaq Nabeel Ashiq, Safeer Khan, Adil Yousaf
{"title":"计算机断层扫描与磁共振成像在急诊科头晕评估中的诊断准确性比较:系统回顾","authors":"Ishfaq Nabeel Ashiq, Safeer Khan, Adil Yousaf","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1778726","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Introduction Both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) play significant roles in assessing patients with dizziness. However, understanding the comparative capabilities of these imaging methods in detecting pathological causes is crucial for determining the most suitable modality. This review aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of MRI and CT scans in managing patients with acute dizziness in the emergency department.\n Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search in various databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane library, British Medical Journals, and ScienceDirect) from 2010 to 2023. We used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess bias risk, considering MRI as the reference standard and CT scan as the index test.\n Results The final analysis included six studies, with 3,993 patients (48% male, 52% female; average age: 56.7 years). Three studies were of high quality, two of medium quality, and one of low quality. Central ischemia was the predominant diagnosis for dizziness. MRI demonstrated higher diagnostic efficacy for stroke compared with CT scans, while mixed results were observed for other multiple diseases when both MRI and CT scans were used.\n Conclusion MRI outperforms CT scans in diagnosing dizziness-related strokes. However, for other causes of dizziness, there is no significant difference between these techniques. Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations associated with MRI. Consequently, to address these concerns, the selection of an imaging technique should be tailored to the individual based on factors such as their clinical presentation, comorbidities, and socioeconomic circumstances.","PeriodicalId":506648,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomography Scan versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Emergency Department for the Evaluation of Dizziness: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Ishfaq Nabeel Ashiq, Safeer Khan, Adil Yousaf\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1778726\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Introduction Both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) play significant roles in assessing patients with dizziness. However, understanding the comparative capabilities of these imaging methods in detecting pathological causes is crucial for determining the most suitable modality. This review aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of MRI and CT scans in managing patients with acute dizziness in the emergency department.\\n Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search in various databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane library, British Medical Journals, and ScienceDirect) from 2010 to 2023. We used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess bias risk, considering MRI as the reference standard and CT scan as the index test.\\n Results The final analysis included six studies, with 3,993 patients (48% male, 52% female; average age: 56.7 years). Three studies were of high quality, two of medium quality, and one of low quality. Central ischemia was the predominant diagnosis for dizziness. MRI demonstrated higher diagnostic efficacy for stroke compared with CT scans, while mixed results were observed for other multiple diseases when both MRI and CT scans were used.\\n Conclusion MRI outperforms CT scans in diagnosing dizziness-related strokes. However, for other causes of dizziness, there is no significant difference between these techniques. Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations associated with MRI. Consequently, to address these concerns, the selection of an imaging technique should be tailored to the individual based on factors such as their clinical presentation, comorbidities, and socioeconomic circumstances.\",\"PeriodicalId\":506648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1778726\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1778726","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言 计算机断层扫描(CT)和磁共振成像(MRI)在评估头晕患者时都发挥着重要作用。然而,了解这些成像方法在检测病理原因方面的比较能力对于确定最合适的模式至关重要。本综述旨在评估 MRI 和 CT 扫描在处理急诊科急性头晕患者时的诊断准确性和临床实用性。方法 根据系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,我们在 2010 年至 2023 年期间的各种数据库(PubMed、Google Scholar、Cochrane library、British Medical Journals 和 ScienceDirect)中进行了全面检索。我们使用 QUADAS-2 工具评估偏倚风险,将 MRI 作为参考标准,CT 扫描作为指标检测。结果 最终分析包括六项研究,共涉及 3993 名患者(48% 为男性,52% 为女性;平均年龄:56.7 岁)。其中三项研究质量较高,两项研究质量中等,一项研究质量较低。中枢性缺血是头晕的主要诊断依据。与 CT 扫描相比,核磁共振成像对中风的诊断效果更高,而对其他多种疾病同时使用核磁共振成像和 CT 扫描的结果则不尽相同。结论 MRI 在诊断与头晕有关的中风方面优于 CT 扫描。然而,对于其他原因引起的头晕,这两种技术之间并无显著差异。然而,必须承认核磁共振成像的局限性。因此,为了解决这些问题,在选择成像技术时应根据患者的临床表现、合并症和社会经济状况等因素因人而异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomography Scan versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Emergency Department for the Evaluation of Dizziness: A Systematic Review
Introduction Both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) play significant roles in assessing patients with dizziness. However, understanding the comparative capabilities of these imaging methods in detecting pathological causes is crucial for determining the most suitable modality. This review aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of MRI and CT scans in managing patients with acute dizziness in the emergency department. Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search in various databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane library, British Medical Journals, and ScienceDirect) from 2010 to 2023. We used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess bias risk, considering MRI as the reference standard and CT scan as the index test. Results The final analysis included six studies, with 3,993 patients (48% male, 52% female; average age: 56.7 years). Three studies were of high quality, two of medium quality, and one of low quality. Central ischemia was the predominant diagnosis for dizziness. MRI demonstrated higher diagnostic efficacy for stroke compared with CT scans, while mixed results were observed for other multiple diseases when both MRI and CT scans were used. Conclusion MRI outperforms CT scans in diagnosing dizziness-related strokes. However, for other causes of dizziness, there is no significant difference between these techniques. Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations associated with MRI. Consequently, to address these concerns, the selection of an imaging technique should be tailored to the individual based on factors such as their clinical presentation, comorbidities, and socioeconomic circumstances.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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