Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2014
Systematic review with meta-analysis: magnetic resonance enterography signs for the detection of inflammation and intestinal damage in Crohn's disease.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Church P C, Turner D, Feldman B M, Walters T D, Greer M-L, Amitai M M, Griffiths A M, ImageKids Study Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD), mucosal healing has become a major goal, with the hope of avoiding intestinal damage from chronic inflammation. Magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) has emerged as a non-invasive means of monitoring inflammation and damage.
AIMS: As part of the development of MRE-based multi-item measures of inflammation and damage for paediatric studies, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify MRE variables used to describe these two distinct concepts.
METHODS: 2501 studies of MRI and CD were identified. Studies written in any language reporting individual MRE signs for patients diagnosed with CD were included. Two-hundred-and-forty-four studies were fully reviewed and 62 were included (inflammation, n = 51; damage, n = 24). Sensitivity, specificity and associated confidence intervals were calculated, and hierarchical summary ROC curves were constructed for each MRE sign.
RESULTS: A total of 22 MRE signs were used to reflect inflammation, and 9 to reflect damage. Diagnostic accuracy of MRE signs of inflammation and damage was heterogeneous; however, wall enhancement, mucosal lesions and wall T2 hyperintensity were the most consistently useful for inflammation (most sensitivities >80% and specificities >90%), and detection of abscess and fistula were most consistently useful for damage (most sensitivities >90%, specificities >95%).
CONCLUSIONS: Identifying the best MRE variables to reflect inflammation and damage will maximise the utility of this rapidly emerging technique and is the first stage of constructing MRE-based indices for evaluating inflammation and intestinal damage.
AIMS: As part of the development of MRE-based multi-item measures of inflammation and damage for paediatric studies, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify MRE variables used to describe these two distinct concepts.
METHODS: 2501 studies of MRI and CD were identified. Studies written in any language reporting individual MRE signs for patients diagnosed with CD were included. Two-hundred-and-forty-four studies were fully reviewed and 62 were included (inflammation, n = 51; damage, n = 24). Sensitivity, specificity and associated confidence intervals were calculated, and hierarchical summary ROC curves were constructed for each MRE sign.
RESULTS: A total of 22 MRE signs were used to reflect inflammation, and 9 to reflect damage. Diagnostic accuracy of MRE signs of inflammation and damage was heterogeneous; however, wall enhancement, mucosal lesions and wall T2 hyperintensity were the most consistently useful for inflammation (most sensitivities >80% and specificities >90%), and detection of abscess and fistula were most consistently useful for damage (most sensitivities >90%, specificities >95%).
CONCLUSIONS: Identifying the best MRE variables to reflect inflammation and damage will maximise the utility of this rapidly emerging technique and is the first stage of constructing MRE-based indices for evaluating inflammation and intestinal damage.