Cargando…

The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the recommended glycemic measures for diagnosing diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science databases from inception to July 2015 for observational stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Martínez-Vizcaíno, Vicente, Cavero-Redondo, Iván, Álvarez-Bueno, Celia, Rodríguez-Artalejo, Fernando
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4849768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27123641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154411
_version_ 1782429597468459008
author Martínez-Vizcaíno, Vicente
Cavero-Redondo, Iván
Álvarez-Bueno, Celia
Rodríguez-Artalejo, Fernando
author_facet Martínez-Vizcaíno, Vicente
Cavero-Redondo, Iván
Álvarez-Bueno, Celia
Rodríguez-Artalejo, Fernando
author_sort Martínez-Vizcaíno, Vicente
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the recommended glycemic measures for diagnosing diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science databases from inception to July 2015 for observational studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and 2-hour plasma glucose (2h-PG). Random effects models for the diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) value computed by Moses’ constant for a linear model and 95% CIs were used to calculate the accuracy of the test. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves (HSROC) were used to summarize the overall test performance. RESULTS: Eleven published studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled dOR values for the diagnosis of retinopathy were 16.32 (95% CI 13.86–19.22) for HbA1c and 4.87 (95% CI 4.39–5.40) for FPG. The area under the HSROC was 0.837 (95% CI 0.781–0.892) for HbA1c and 0.735 (95% CI 0.657–0.813) for FPG. The 95% confidence region for the point that summarizes the overall test performance of the included studies occurs where the cut-offs ranged from 6.1% (43.2 mmol/mol) to 7.8% (61.7 mmol/mol) for HbA1c and from 7.8 to 9.3 mmol/L for FPG. In the four studies that provided information regarding 2h-PG, the pooled accuracy estimates for HbA1c were similar to those of 2h-PG; the overall performance for HbA1c was superior to that for FPG. CONCLUSIONS: The three recommended tests for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes in nonpregnant adults showed sufficient accuracy for their use in clinical settings, although the overall accuracy for the diagnosis of retinopathy was similar for HbA1c and 2h-PG, which were both more accurate than for FPG. Due to the variability and inconveniences of the glucose level-based methods, HbA1c appears to be the most appropriate method for the diagnosis diabetic retinopathy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4849768
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48497682016-05-07 The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Martínez-Vizcaíno, Vicente Cavero-Redondo, Iván Álvarez-Bueno, Celia Rodríguez-Artalejo, Fernando PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the recommended glycemic measures for diagnosing diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science databases from inception to July 2015 for observational studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and 2-hour plasma glucose (2h-PG). Random effects models for the diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) value computed by Moses’ constant for a linear model and 95% CIs were used to calculate the accuracy of the test. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves (HSROC) were used to summarize the overall test performance. RESULTS: Eleven published studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled dOR values for the diagnosis of retinopathy were 16.32 (95% CI 13.86–19.22) for HbA1c and 4.87 (95% CI 4.39–5.40) for FPG. The area under the HSROC was 0.837 (95% CI 0.781–0.892) for HbA1c and 0.735 (95% CI 0.657–0.813) for FPG. The 95% confidence region for the point that summarizes the overall test performance of the included studies occurs where the cut-offs ranged from 6.1% (43.2 mmol/mol) to 7.8% (61.7 mmol/mol) for HbA1c and from 7.8 to 9.3 mmol/L for FPG. In the four studies that provided information regarding 2h-PG, the pooled accuracy estimates for HbA1c were similar to those of 2h-PG; the overall performance for HbA1c was superior to that for FPG. CONCLUSIONS: The three recommended tests for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes in nonpregnant adults showed sufficient accuracy for their use in clinical settings, although the overall accuracy for the diagnosis of retinopathy was similar for HbA1c and 2h-PG, which were both more accurate than for FPG. Due to the variability and inconveniences of the glucose level-based methods, HbA1c appears to be the most appropriate method for the diagnosis diabetic retinopathy. Public Library of Science 2016-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4849768/ /pubmed/27123641 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154411 Text en © 2016 Martínez-Vizcaíno et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Martínez-Vizcaíno, Vicente
Cavero-Redondo, Iván
Álvarez-Bueno, Celia
Rodríguez-Artalejo, Fernando
The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short The Accuracy of Diagnostic Methods for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort accuracy of diagnostic methods for diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4849768/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27123641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154411
work_keys_str_mv AT martinezvizcainovicente theaccuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT caveroredondoivan theaccuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT alvarezbuenocelia theaccuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT rodriguezartalejofernando theaccuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT martinezvizcainovicente accuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT caveroredondoivan accuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT alvarezbuenocelia accuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT rodriguezartalejofernando accuracyofdiagnosticmethodsfordiabeticretinopathyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis