Cargando…

Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) can occur after contact with aeroallergens like house dust mites, pollen, and animal dander. Despite its controversial diagnostic value, the atopy patch test (APT) has been used as an important tool in the diagnosis of AD caused by house dust mites. Here, we presen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Yumei, Peng, Jianglong, Zhou, Ying, Cui, Yubao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5706347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29209493
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13601-017-0178-3
_version_ 1783282213290246144
author Liu, Yumei
Peng, Jianglong
Zhou, Ying
Cui, Yubao
author_facet Liu, Yumei
Peng, Jianglong
Zhou, Ying
Cui, Yubao
author_sort Liu, Yumei
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) can occur after contact with aeroallergens like house dust mites, pollen, and animal dander. Despite its controversial diagnostic value, the atopy patch test (APT) has been used as an important tool in the diagnosis of AD caused by house dust mites. Here, we present a meta-analysis comparing APT to the common skin prick test (SPT) in the diagnosis of mite-induced AD. METHODS: A structured search was performed using online databases and bibliographies published as of April 30, 2017. All studies evaluating the accuracy of APT and SPT in the diagnosis of mite-induced atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome were selected, appraised, and data was extracted. RESULTS: Ten studies were identified for inclusion in our analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratios for APT were 0.54 (95% CI 0.42–0.66), 0.72 (95% CI 0.56–0.85), 1.97 (95% CI 1.20–3.23), 0.63 (95% CI 0.48–0.83), and 3.12 (95% CI 1.53–6.39). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.65 (95% CI 0.61–0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis indicates that APT is a useful tool in the screening of mite-induced AD, although this conclusion must be interpreted cautiously due to high heterogeneity among the included studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5706347
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57063472017-12-05 Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis Liu, Yumei Peng, Jianglong Zhou, Ying Cui, Yubao Clin Transl Allergy Review BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) can occur after contact with aeroallergens like house dust mites, pollen, and animal dander. Despite its controversial diagnostic value, the atopy patch test (APT) has been used as an important tool in the diagnosis of AD caused by house dust mites. Here, we present a meta-analysis comparing APT to the common skin prick test (SPT) in the diagnosis of mite-induced AD. METHODS: A structured search was performed using online databases and bibliographies published as of April 30, 2017. All studies evaluating the accuracy of APT and SPT in the diagnosis of mite-induced atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome were selected, appraised, and data was extracted. RESULTS: Ten studies were identified for inclusion in our analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratios for APT were 0.54 (95% CI 0.42–0.66), 0.72 (95% CI 0.56–0.85), 1.97 (95% CI 1.20–3.23), 0.63 (95% CI 0.48–0.83), and 3.12 (95% CI 1.53–6.39). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.65 (95% CI 0.61–0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis indicates that APT is a useful tool in the screening of mite-induced AD, although this conclusion must be interpreted cautiously due to high heterogeneity among the included studies. BioMed Central 2017-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5706347/ /pubmed/29209493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13601-017-0178-3 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 Review
Liu, Yumei
Peng, Jianglong
Zhou, Ying
Cui, Yubao
Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5706347/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29209493
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13601-017-0178-3
work_keys_str_mv AT liuyumei comparisonofatopypatchtestingtoskinpricktestingfordiagnosingmiteinducedatopicdermatitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pengjianglong comparisonofatopypatchtestingtoskinpricktestingfordiagnosingmiteinducedatopicdermatitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhouying comparisonofatopypatchtestingtoskinpricktestingfordiagnosingmiteinducedatopicdermatitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT cuiyubao comparisonofatopypatchtestingtoskinpricktestingfordiagnosingmiteinducedatopicdermatitisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis