Cargando…
Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of the halo sign in the assessment of GCA. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane central register databases up to August 2020. Studies informing on the sensi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8421813/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34514295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rap/rkab059 |
_version_ | 1783749165987135488 |
---|---|
author | Sebastian, Alwin Coath, Fiona Innes, Sue Jackson, Jo van der Geest, Kornelis S M Dasgupta, Bhaskar |
author_facet | Sebastian, Alwin Coath, Fiona Innes, Sue Jackson, Jo van der Geest, Kornelis S M Dasgupta, Bhaskar |
author_sort | Sebastian, Alwin |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of the halo sign in the assessment of GCA. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane central register databases up to August 2020. Studies informing on the sensitivity and specificity of the US halo sign for GCA (index test) were selected. Studies with a minimum of five participants were included. Study articles using clinical criteria, imaging such as PET-CT and/or temporal artery biopsy (TAB) as the reference standards were selected. Meta-analysis was conducted with a bivariate model. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 4023 studies. Twenty-three studies (patients n = 2711) met the inclusion criteria. Prospective (11 studies) and retrospective (12 studies) studies in academic and non-academic centres were included. Using clinical diagnosis as the standard (18 studies) yielded a pooled sensitivity of 67% (95% CI: 51, 80) and a specificity of 95% (95% CI: 89, 98%). This gave a positive and negative likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of GCA of 14.2 (95% CI: 5.7, 35.5) and 0.375 (95% CI: 0.22, 0.54), respectively. Using TAB as the standard (15 studies) yielded a pooled sensitivity of 63% (95% CI: 50, 75) and a specificity of 90% (95% CI: 81, 95). CONCLUSION: The US halo sign is a sensitive and specific approach for GCA assessment and plays a pivotal role in diagnosis of GCA in routine clinical practice. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020202179. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8421813 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84218132021-09-09 Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis Sebastian, Alwin Coath, Fiona Innes, Sue Jackson, Jo van der Geest, Kornelis S M Dasgupta, Bhaskar Rheumatol Adv Pract Systematic Review and Meta Analysis OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of the halo sign in the assessment of GCA. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane central register databases up to August 2020. Studies informing on the sensitivity and specificity of the US halo sign for GCA (index test) were selected. Studies with a minimum of five participants were included. Study articles using clinical criteria, imaging such as PET-CT and/or temporal artery biopsy (TAB) as the reference standards were selected. Meta-analysis was conducted with a bivariate model. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 4023 studies. Twenty-three studies (patients n = 2711) met the inclusion criteria. Prospective (11 studies) and retrospective (12 studies) studies in academic and non-academic centres were included. Using clinical diagnosis as the standard (18 studies) yielded a pooled sensitivity of 67% (95% CI: 51, 80) and a specificity of 95% (95% CI: 89, 98%). This gave a positive and negative likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of GCA of 14.2 (95% CI: 5.7, 35.5) and 0.375 (95% CI: 0.22, 0.54), respectively. Using TAB as the standard (15 studies) yielded a pooled sensitivity of 63% (95% CI: 50, 75) and a specificity of 90% (95% CI: 81, 95). CONCLUSION: The US halo sign is a sensitive and specific approach for GCA assessment and plays a pivotal role in diagnosis of GCA in routine clinical practice. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020202179. Oxford University Press 2021-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8421813/ /pubmed/34514295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rap/rkab059 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review and Meta Analysis Sebastian, Alwin Coath, Fiona Innes, Sue Jackson, Jo van der Geest, Kornelis S M Dasgupta, Bhaskar Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | role of the halo sign in the assessment of giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Systematic Review and Meta Analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8421813/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34514295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rap/rkab059 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sebastianalwin roleofthehalosignintheassessmentofgiantcellarteritisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT coathfiona roleofthehalosignintheassessmentofgiantcellarteritisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT innessue roleofthehalosignintheassessmentofgiantcellarteritisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jacksonjo roleofthehalosignintheassessmentofgiantcellarteritisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT vandergeestkornelissm roleofthehalosignintheassessmentofgiantcellarteritisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT dasguptabhaskar roleofthehalosignintheassessmentofgiantcellarteritisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |