Revista chilena de infectologia : organo oficial de la Sociedad Chilena de Infectologia · 2017
[Validity of three methods for inmuno-diagnostic of neurocysticercosis: systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis 1960-2014].
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Cardona-Arias Jaiberth Antonio, Carrasquilla-Agudelo Yoneida Elena, Restrepo-Posada Deisy Cristina
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The screening of neurocysticercosis is complex and immunological methods have varying validity.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of ELISA for antigen and antibody, and EITB for antibody in the screening of neurocysticercosis.
METHODS: Meta-analysis of diagnostic tests with an ex-ante protocol implemented in five databases with 15 search strategies, ensuring reproducibility in the selection and extraction of information. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), diagnostic odds ratio and ROC curve were estimated in MetaDiSc, and predictive values, and Youden index were estimated in Epidat.
RESULTS: EITB presented sensitivity of 85.7% (95% CI 83.5-87.7), specificity 93.9% (95% CI = 92.7-95.0), PLR 19.6 (95% CI = 8,6-44.6), NLR 0.16 (95% CI = 0.12-0.21), OR diagnostic 136.2 (95% CI = 54.7-342.6) and area under the curve 0.926. In ELISA for antibody sensitivity was 87.5% (95% CI = 86.1-88.8), specificity 92.2% (95% CI = 91.4-93.0), PLR 11.3 (95% CI = 8.45-15.11), NLR 0.15 (95% CI = 0.13-0.18), diagnostic OR 87.4 (95% CI = 60.1-127.1) and area under the curve 0.950. ELISA for antigen showed low diagnostic validity. No differences were found in these parameters by sample, antigen or antibody type.
CONCLUSION: ELISA for antibodies and EITB have a similar diagnostic value, detection of serum and CSF showed a similar validity.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of ELISA for antigen and antibody, and EITB for antibody in the screening of neurocysticercosis.
METHODS: Meta-analysis of diagnostic tests with an ex-ante protocol implemented in five databases with 15 search strategies, ensuring reproducibility in the selection and extraction of information. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), diagnostic odds ratio and ROC curve were estimated in MetaDiSc, and predictive values, and Youden index were estimated in Epidat.
RESULTS: EITB presented sensitivity of 85.7% (95% CI 83.5-87.7), specificity 93.9% (95% CI = 92.7-95.0), PLR 19.6 (95% CI = 8,6-44.6), NLR 0.16 (95% CI = 0.12-0.21), OR diagnostic 136.2 (95% CI = 54.7-342.6) and area under the curve 0.926. In ELISA for antibody sensitivity was 87.5% (95% CI = 86.1-88.8), specificity 92.2% (95% CI = 91.4-93.0), PLR 11.3 (95% CI = 8.45-15.11), NLR 0.15 (95% CI = 0.13-0.18), diagnostic OR 87.4 (95% CI = 60.1-127.1) and area under the curve 0.950. ELISA for antigen showed low diagnostic validity. No differences were found in these parameters by sample, antigen or antibody type.
CONCLUSION: ELISA for antibodies and EITB have a similar diagnostic value, detection of serum and CSF showed a similar validity.