Cargando…
A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to determine the validity of the anion gap to screen for hyperlactatemia in critically ill patients. We have previously shown that the anion gap does not predict 31-day and in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients. The present review...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5670505/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29100545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2853-9 |
_version_ | 1783276042536878080 |
---|---|
author | Glasmacher, Stella Andrea Stones, William |
author_facet | Glasmacher, Stella Andrea Stones, William |
author_sort | Glasmacher, Stella Andrea |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to determine the validity of the anion gap to screen for hyperlactatemia in critically ill patients. We have previously shown that the anion gap does not predict 31-day and in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients. The present review aims to add confirmatory evidence to identify whether the anion gap is a suitable tool for risk stratification in low-resource countries. RESULTS: Nine studies reporting on 4504 samples from 2111 patients were included. The anion gap failed to detect hyperlactatemia defined as lactate above 2.5 mmol/l but showed good discriminatory ability for the detection of severe hyperlactatemia defined as lactate over 4 mmol/l. At the 2.5 mmol/l threshold, the anion gap had high specificity but low sensitivity for the detection of hyperlactatemia. A meta-analysis of correlation coefficients yielded high statistical heterogeneity. Therefore, in keeping with our previous findings, the use of the anion gap for risk stratification as an alternative to lactate cannot be recommended. However, the strength of the evidence we have synthesised is adversely affected by the small number of studies included, inconsistency of effect measures and positivity thresholds reported, and selection bias within individual studies. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42015016470 (registered on the 4th February 2015). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-017-2853-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5670505 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56705052017-11-15 A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia Glasmacher, Stella Andrea Stones, William BMC Res Notes Research Note OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to determine the validity of the anion gap to screen for hyperlactatemia in critically ill patients. We have previously shown that the anion gap does not predict 31-day and in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients. The present review aims to add confirmatory evidence to identify whether the anion gap is a suitable tool for risk stratification in low-resource countries. RESULTS: Nine studies reporting on 4504 samples from 2111 patients were included. The anion gap failed to detect hyperlactatemia defined as lactate above 2.5 mmol/l but showed good discriminatory ability for the detection of severe hyperlactatemia defined as lactate over 4 mmol/l. At the 2.5 mmol/l threshold, the anion gap had high specificity but low sensitivity for the detection of hyperlactatemia. A meta-analysis of correlation coefficients yielded high statistical heterogeneity. Therefore, in keeping with our previous findings, the use of the anion gap for risk stratification as an alternative to lactate cannot be recommended. However, the strength of the evidence we have synthesised is adversely affected by the small number of studies included, inconsistency of effect measures and positivity thresholds reported, and selection bias within individual studies. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42015016470 (registered on the 4th February 2015). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-017-2853-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5670505/ /pubmed/29100545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2853-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Note Glasmacher, Stella Andrea Stones, William A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia |
title | A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia |
title_full | A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia |
title_fullStr | A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia |
title_short | A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia |
title_sort | systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of the validity of anion gap as a screening tool for hyperlactatemia |
topic | Research Note |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5670505/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29100545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2853-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT glasmacherstellaandrea asystematicreviewanddiagnostictestaccuracymetaanalysisofthevalidityofaniongapasascreeningtoolforhyperlactatemia AT stoneswilliam asystematicreviewanddiagnostictestaccuracymetaanalysisofthevalidityofaniongapasascreeningtoolforhyperlactatemia AT glasmacherstellaandrea systematicreviewanddiagnostictestaccuracymetaanalysisofthevalidityofaniongapasascreeningtoolforhyperlactatemia AT stoneswilliam systematicreviewanddiagnostictestaccuracymetaanalysisofthevalidityofaniongapasascreeningtoolforhyperlactatemia |