Alireza Baratloo, Koohyar Ahmadzadeh, Mohammad Mehdi Forouzanfar, Mahmoud Yousefifard, Mehri Farhang Ranjbar, Behrooz Hashemi, Seyed Hadi Aghili
{"title":"NEXUS与加拿大C松规则预测颈椎损伤;系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Alireza Baratloo, Koohyar Ahmadzadeh, Mohammad Mehdi Forouzanfar, Mahmoud Yousefifard, Mehri Farhang Ranjbar, Behrooz Hashemi, Seyed Hadi Aghili","doi":"10.22037/aaem.v11i1.2143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinical decision tools have been shown to reduce imaging rates for clearance of suspected cervical spine injury (CSI). This review provides more comprehensive evidence on the diagnostic capabilities of National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) and Canadian C-spine rule (CCR) in this regard.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A systematic review of the current literature was performed on studies published until Jan 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023, in databases of Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, investigating the performance of NEXUS and CCR in blunt trauma patients. QUADAS-2 and GRADE guidelines were used to assess the quality and certainty of evidence. All analyses were performed using the STATA 14.0 statistical analysis software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35 articles comprising 70000 patients for NEXUS and 33000 patients for CCR were included in this review. NEXUS and CCR were evaluated to have a sensitivity of 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88 to 0.98) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.98 to 1.00) in the detection of any CSI and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.00) in the detection of clinically important CSI. The area under the curve (AUC) of NEXUS and CCR was 0.85 and 0.97 for any CSI and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74 to 0.81) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.96) for clinically important CSI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates that both NEXUS and CCR can be used in ruling out patients with low risk of CSI, and CCR was shown to have superior performance. Even though these tools have low specificity, their application can still greatly reduce the number of radiographic imaging performed in emergency departments.</p>","PeriodicalId":8146,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":"11 1","pages":"e66"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0c/0c/aaem-11-e66.PMC10568954.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"NEXUS vs. Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) in Predicting Cervical Spine Injuries; a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Alireza Baratloo, Koohyar Ahmadzadeh, Mohammad Mehdi Forouzanfar, Mahmoud Yousefifard, Mehri Farhang Ranjbar, Behrooz Hashemi, Seyed Hadi Aghili\",\"doi\":\"10.22037/aaem.v11i1.2143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinical decision tools have been shown to reduce imaging rates for clearance of suspected cervical spine injury (CSI). This review provides more comprehensive evidence on the diagnostic capabilities of National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) and Canadian C-spine rule (CCR) in this regard.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A systematic review of the current literature was performed on studies published until Jan 26<sup>th</sup>, 2023, in databases of Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, investigating the performance of NEXUS and CCR in blunt trauma patients. QUADAS-2 and GRADE guidelines were used to assess the quality and certainty of evidence. All analyses were performed using the STATA 14.0 statistical analysis software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35 articles comprising 70000 patients for NEXUS and 33000 patients for CCR were included in this review. NEXUS and CCR were evaluated to have a sensitivity of 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88 to 0.98) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.98 to 1.00) in the detection of any CSI and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.00) in the detection of clinically important CSI. The area under the curve (AUC) of NEXUS and CCR was 0.85 and 0.97 for any CSI and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74 to 0.81) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.96) for clinically important CSI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates that both NEXUS and CCR can be used in ruling out patients with low risk of CSI, and CCR was shown to have superior performance. Even though these tools have low specificity, their application can still greatly reduce the number of radiographic imaging performed in emergency departments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"e66\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0c/0c/aaem-11-e66.PMC10568954.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22037/aaem.v11i1.2143\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22037/aaem.v11i1.2143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
引言:临床决策工具已被证明可以降低疑似颈椎损伤(CSI)的影像学清除率。这篇综述为国家紧急X射线照相利用研究(NEXUS)和加拿大C平规则(CCR)在这方面的诊断能力提供了更全面的证据。方法:对截至2023年1月26日在Medline、Scopus、Web of Science和Embase数据库中发表的研究进行系统综述,调查NEXUS和CCR在钝性创伤患者中的表现。QUADAS-2和GRADE指南用于评估证据的质量和确定性。所有分析均使用STATA 14.0统计分析软件进行。结果:35篇文章包括70000名NEXUS患者和33000名CCR患者。NEXUS和CCR在检测任何CSI时的灵敏度分别为0.94(95%置信区间(CI):0.88至0.98)和1.00(95%可信区间:0.98至1.00),在检测临床重要CSI时灵敏度分别为0.95(95%CI:0.89至0.98。NEXUS和CCR的曲线下面积(AUC)在任何CSI中分别为0.85和0.97,在临床重要CSI中为0.78(95%CI:0.74至0.81)和0.94(95%CI:0.91至0.96)。尽管这些工具的特异性很低,但它们的应用仍然可以大大减少急诊科进行放射成像的次数。
NEXUS vs. Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) in Predicting Cervical Spine Injuries; a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Introduction: Clinical decision tools have been shown to reduce imaging rates for clearance of suspected cervical spine injury (CSI). This review provides more comprehensive evidence on the diagnostic capabilities of National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) and Canadian C-spine rule (CCR) in this regard.
Method: A systematic review of the current literature was performed on studies published until Jan 26th, 2023, in databases of Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, investigating the performance of NEXUS and CCR in blunt trauma patients. QUADAS-2 and GRADE guidelines were used to assess the quality and certainty of evidence. All analyses were performed using the STATA 14.0 statistical analysis software.
Results: 35 articles comprising 70000 patients for NEXUS and 33000 patients for CCR were included in this review. NEXUS and CCR were evaluated to have a sensitivity of 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88 to 0.98) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.98 to 1.00) in the detection of any CSI and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.00) in the detection of clinically important CSI. The area under the curve (AUC) of NEXUS and CCR was 0.85 and 0.97 for any CSI and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74 to 0.81) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.96) for clinically important CSI.
Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that both NEXUS and CCR can be used in ruling out patients with low risk of CSI, and CCR was shown to have superior performance. Even though these tools have low specificity, their application can still greatly reduce the number of radiographic imaging performed in emergency departments.