A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT in gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis. | LitMetric

Objective: Dual-energy CT (DECT) is being widely used in suspected gout patients in recent years. Many clinicians tend to use DECT instead of aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of gout, but its accuracy has shown controversial results. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we sought to evaluate the accuracy of DECT in the diagnosis of gout.

Materials And Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature published in Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases. Studies included are all clinical trials of DECT in the diagnosis of gout. Quality assessment of bias and applicability was conducted using the Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2). We recorded sensitivity and specificity of algorithms and calculated positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic odd ratio (DOR), and respective confidence intervals (CI). The summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) was drawn to get the Cochran Q-index and the area under the curve (AUC).

Results: Seven studies were included in this review and showed high homogeneity. The analysis results presented the pooled sensitivity was 88% (95% CI 84-90%) and specificity was 90% (95% CI 85-93%). Then, we figured out that the pooled PLR was 8.48 (95% CI 5.89-12.22) and NLR was 0.10 (95% CI 0.04-0.24) respectively. In addition, Cochran-Q was 0.90 and AUC was 0.9565 in sROC curve.

Conclusions: DECT showed relatively high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of gout. Synthetically considering these DECT abnormalities could improve the diagnostic sensitivity. More rigorous and standardized studies are still needed to support these findings.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-018-2948-yDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

systematic review
12
diagnosis gout
12
diagnostic accuracy
8
review meta-analysis
8
dect diagnosis
8
studies included
8
sensitivity specificity
8
likelihood ratio
8
dect
6
gout
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!