Pancreas · 2014
Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the diagnosis of pancreas divisum: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rustagi Tarun, Njei Basile
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to perform a structured meta-analysis of all eligible studies to assess the overall diagnostic use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) alone or with secretin enhancement (secretin-enhanced MRCP [S-MRCP]) in the detection of pancreas divisum.
METHODS: Two authors independently performed a comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 2013. Studies were included if they allowed construction of 2 × 2 contingency tables of MRCP and/or S-MRCP compared with criterion standard. DerSimonian-Laird random effect models were used to estimate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, specificity, and quantitative receiver operating characteristics.
RESULTS: Of 51 citations, 10 studies with 1474 patients were included. Secretin-enhanced MRCP had a higher overall diagnostic performance than MRCP (S-MRCP: pooled sensitivity, 86% [95% confidence interval (CI), 77%-93%]; specificity, 97% [95% CI, 94%-99%]; and area under the curve, 0.93 ± 0.056 compared with MRCP: sensitivity, 52% [95% CI, 45%-59%]; specificity, 97% [95% CI, 94%-99%]; and area under the curve, 0.76 ± 0.104). Pooled diagnostic odds ratios were 72.19 (95% CI, 5.66-938.8) and 23.39 (95% CI, 7.93-69.02) for S-MRCP and MRCP, respectively. Visual inspection of the funnel plot showed low potential for publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Secretin-enhanced MRCP has a much higher diagnostic accuracy than MRCP and should be preferred for diagnosis of pancreas divisum.
METHODS: Two authors independently performed a comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 2013. Studies were included if they allowed construction of 2 × 2 contingency tables of MRCP and/or S-MRCP compared with criterion standard. DerSimonian-Laird random effect models were used to estimate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, specificity, and quantitative receiver operating characteristics.
RESULTS: Of 51 citations, 10 studies with 1474 patients were included. Secretin-enhanced MRCP had a higher overall diagnostic performance than MRCP (S-MRCP: pooled sensitivity, 86% [95% confidence interval (CI), 77%-93%]; specificity, 97% [95% CI, 94%-99%]; and area under the curve, 0.93 ± 0.056 compared with MRCP: sensitivity, 52% [95% CI, 45%-59%]; specificity, 97% [95% CI, 94%-99%]; and area under the curve, 0.76 ± 0.104). Pooled diagnostic odds ratios were 72.19 (95% CI, 5.66-938.8) and 23.39 (95% CI, 7.93-69.02) for S-MRCP and MRCP, respectively. Visual inspection of the funnel plot showed low potential for publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Secretin-enhanced MRCP has a much higher diagnostic accuracy than MRCP and should be preferred for diagnosis of pancreas divisum.