{"title":"栓系控制和磁控胶囊内镜诊断食管疾病的准确性:荟萃分析。","authors":"Jian Yang, Yi-Hu Mao, Qian Zeng","doi":"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy (MCCE), primarily represented by the ANKON and Mirocam capsule systems, uses tethered control and magnetic control methods, respectively, for esophageal examination. However, due to variations in results and capsule types across studies, conclusions regarding its diagnostic accuracy remain inconsistent.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Wanfang databases, covering studies published up to November 4, 2024. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of MCCE for esophageal diseases, we used a bivariate random-effects model in Stata 15.0, synthesizing estimates for sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and generating a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve with the corresponding area under the curve (AUC). Where appropriate, sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the stability of the results, and meta-regression was conducted to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies with 1155 patients were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MCCE for diagnosing esophageal diseases were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.97) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-0.99), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 663.00 (95% CI: 157.24-2795.56), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.99. The pooled positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were 32.72 (95% CI: 11.94-89.71) and 0.05 (95% CI: 0.03-0.09), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis highlights the high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MCCE in diagnosing esophageal diseases, suggesting it as a promising alternative for patients unable to undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy. However, limited studies and observed heterogeneity may restrict its routine use, emphasizing the need for large-scale, multicenter prospective studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":15457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Accuracy of Tethered Control and Magnetically Controlled Capsule Endoscopy in Esophageal Diseases: A Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jian Yang, Yi-Hu Mao, Qian Zeng\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy (MCCE), primarily represented by the ANKON and Mirocam capsule systems, uses tethered control and magnetic control methods, respectively, for esophageal examination. However, due to variations in results and capsule types across studies, conclusions regarding its diagnostic accuracy remain inconsistent.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Wanfang databases, covering studies published up to November 4, 2024. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of MCCE for esophageal diseases, we used a bivariate random-effects model in Stata 15.0, synthesizing estimates for sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and generating a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve with the corresponding area under the curve (AUC). Where appropriate, sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the stability of the results, and meta-regression was conducted to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies with 1155 patients were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MCCE for diagnosing esophageal diseases were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.97) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-0.99), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 663.00 (95% CI: 157.24-2795.56), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.99. The pooled positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were 32.72 (95% CI: 11.94-89.71) and 0.05 (95% CI: 0.03-0.09), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis highlights the high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MCCE in diagnosing esophageal diseases, suggesting it as a promising alternative for patients unable to undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy. However, limited studies and observed heterogeneity may restrict its routine use, emphasizing the need for large-scale, multicenter prospective studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002184\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002184","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Diagnostic Accuracy of Tethered Control and Magnetically Controlled Capsule Endoscopy in Esophageal Diseases: A Meta-analysis.
Background: Magnetic-controlled capsule endoscopy (MCCE), primarily represented by the ANKON and Mirocam capsule systems, uses tethered control and magnetic control methods, respectively, for esophageal examination. However, due to variations in results and capsule types across studies, conclusions regarding its diagnostic accuracy remain inconsistent.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Wanfang databases, covering studies published up to November 4, 2024. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of MCCE for esophageal diseases, we used a bivariate random-effects model in Stata 15.0, synthesizing estimates for sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and generating a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve with the corresponding area under the curve (AUC). Where appropriate, sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the stability of the results, and meta-regression was conducted to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity.
Results: Ten studies with 1155 patients were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MCCE for diagnosing esophageal diseases were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.97) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92-0.99), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 663.00 (95% CI: 157.24-2795.56), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.99. The pooled positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were 32.72 (95% CI: 11.94-89.71) and 0.05 (95% CI: 0.03-0.09), respectively.
Conclusions: This meta-analysis highlights the high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MCCE in diagnosing esophageal diseases, suggesting it as a promising alternative for patients unable to undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy. However, limited studies and observed heterogeneity may restrict its routine use, emphasizing the need for large-scale, multicenter prospective studies.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology gathers the world''s latest, most relevant clinical studies and reviews, case reports, and technical expertise in a single source. Regular features include cutting-edge, peer-reviewed articles and clinical reviews that put the latest research and development into the context of your practice. Also included are biographies, focused organ reviews, practice management, and therapeutic recommendations.