磨玻璃浊对2019冠状病毒病疑似患者的诊断价值:荟萃分析

Yan-An Zhu, Cui-Qing Yan, Ya-Ni Duan, Lei-lei Tang, Jun-ying Zhu, Xiuzheng Chen, Yun-xu Dong, Weimin Liu, Wenjie Tang, Yuefei Guo, J. Qin
{"title":"磨玻璃浊对2019冠状病毒病疑似患者的诊断价值:荟萃分析","authors":"Yan-An Zhu, Cui-Qing Yan, Ya-Ni Duan, Lei-lei Tang, Jun-ying Zhu, Xiuzheng Chen, Yun-xu Dong, Weimin Liu, Wenjie Tang, Yuefei Guo, J. Qin","doi":"10.4103/RID.RID_7_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of ground-glass opacity (GGO) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched from November 01, 2019 to November 29, 2020. Studies providing the diagnostic test accuracy of chest computed tomography (CT) and description of detailed CT features for COVID-19 were included. Data were extracted from the publications. The sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were pooled. Heterogeneity was detected across included studies. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 1618 cases were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61–0.84), 0.52 (95% CI, 0.33–0.70), and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.66–0.74), respectively. There was obvious heterogeneity among included studies (P < 0.05). Differences in the study region, inclusion criteria, research quality, or research methods might have contributed to the heterogeneity. The included studies had no significant publication bias (P > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 was diagnosed not only by GGO with a medium level of diagnostic accuracy but also by white blood cell counts, epidemic history, and revers transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing.","PeriodicalId":101055,"journal":{"name":"Radiology of Infectious Diseases","volume":"49 1","pages":"31 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic value of ground-glass opacity in suspected coronavirus disease 2019 patients: A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Yan-An Zhu, Cui-Qing Yan, Ya-Ni Duan, Lei-lei Tang, Jun-ying Zhu, Xiuzheng Chen, Yun-xu Dong, Weimin Liu, Wenjie Tang, Yuefei Guo, J. Qin\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/RID.RID_7_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of ground-glass opacity (GGO) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched from November 01, 2019 to November 29, 2020. Studies providing the diagnostic test accuracy of chest computed tomography (CT) and description of detailed CT features for COVID-19 were included. Data were extracted from the publications. The sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were pooled. Heterogeneity was detected across included studies. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 1618 cases were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61–0.84), 0.52 (95% CI, 0.33–0.70), and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.66–0.74), respectively. There was obvious heterogeneity among included studies (P < 0.05). Differences in the study region, inclusion criteria, research quality, or research methods might have contributed to the heterogeneity. The included studies had no significant publication bias (P > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 was diagnosed not only by GGO with a medium level of diagnostic accuracy but also by white blood cell counts, epidemic history, and revers transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":101055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiology of Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"31 - 41\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiology of Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/RID.RID_7_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/RID.RID_7_21","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

目的:评价磨玻璃浊(GGO)对疑似冠状病毒病2019 (COVID-19)的诊断效果。材料与方法:在本系统综述和荟萃分析中,检索了2019年11月1日至2020年11月29日的PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Scopus、Web of Science、CNKI和万方数据库。包括提供胸部计算机断层扫描(CT)诊断测试准确性和详细CT特征描述的研究。数据摘自出版物。对敏感性、特异性和总体受试者工作特征曲线进行汇总。在纳入的研究中发现了异质性。结果:纳入11项研究,共1618例。合并敏感性、特异性和曲线下面积分别为0.74(95%可信区间[CI], 0.61-0.84)、0.52 (95% CI, 0.33-0.70)和0.70 (95% CI, 0.66-0.74)。纳入研究间存在明显的异质性(P < 0.05)。研究区域、纳入标准、研究质量或研究方法的差异可能导致异质性。纳入的研究没有显著的发表偏倚(P < 0.01)。结论:GGO不仅能诊断COVID-19,而且白细胞计数、流行史和逆转录聚合酶链反应检测也能诊断COVID-19,诊断准确率中等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic value of ground-glass opacity in suspected coronavirus disease 2019 patients: A meta-analysis
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of ground-glass opacity (GGO) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched from November 01, 2019 to November 29, 2020. Studies providing the diagnostic test accuracy of chest computed tomography (CT) and description of detailed CT features for COVID-19 were included. Data were extracted from the publications. The sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were pooled. Heterogeneity was detected across included studies. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 1618 cases were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61–0.84), 0.52 (95% CI, 0.33–0.70), and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.66–0.74), respectively. There was obvious heterogeneity among included studies (P < 0.05). Differences in the study region, inclusion criteria, research quality, or research methods might have contributed to the heterogeneity. The included studies had no significant publication bias (P > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 was diagnosed not only by GGO with a medium level of diagnostic accuracy but also by white blood cell counts, epidemic history, and revers transcription-polymerase chain reaction testing.
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