Cargando…
Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Computed tomography (CT) diagnosis of empyema is challenging because current literature features multiple overlapping pleural findings. We aimed to identify informative findings for structured reporting. The screening according to inclusion criteria (P: Pleural empyema, I: CT C: culture/gram-stain/p...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8778997/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35049844 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8010003 |
_version_ | 1784637463389536256 |
---|---|
author | Zettinig, Desiree D’Antonoli, Tugba Akinci Wilder-Smith, Adrian Bremerich, Jens Roth, Jan A. Sexauer, Raphael |
author_facet | Zettinig, Desiree D’Antonoli, Tugba Akinci Wilder-Smith, Adrian Bremerich, Jens Roth, Jan A. Sexauer, Raphael |
author_sort | Zettinig, Desiree |
collection | PubMed |
description | Computed tomography (CT) diagnosis of empyema is challenging because current literature features multiple overlapping pleural findings. We aimed to identify informative findings for structured reporting. The screening according to inclusion criteria (P: Pleural empyema, I: CT C: culture/gram-stain/pathology/pus, O: Diagnostic accuracy measures), data extraction, and risk of bias assessment of studies published between 01-1980 and 10-2021 on Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science (WOS) were performed independently by two reviewers. CT findings with pooled diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) with 95% confidence intervals, not including 1, were considered as informative. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy for CT findings were calculated by using a bivariate random-effects model and heterogeneity sources were evaluated. Ten studies with a total of 252 patients with and 846 without empyema were included. From 119 overlapping descriptors, five informative CT findings were identified: Pleural enhancement, thickening, loculation, fat thickening, and fat stranding with an AUC of 0.80 (hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic, HSROC). Potential sources of heterogeneity were different thresholds, empyema prevalence, and study year. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8778997 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87789972022-01-22 Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Zettinig, Desiree D’Antonoli, Tugba Akinci Wilder-Smith, Adrian Bremerich, Jens Roth, Jan A. Sexauer, Raphael J Imaging Systematic Review Computed tomography (CT) diagnosis of empyema is challenging because current literature features multiple overlapping pleural findings. We aimed to identify informative findings for structured reporting. The screening according to inclusion criteria (P: Pleural empyema, I: CT C: culture/gram-stain/pathology/pus, O: Diagnostic accuracy measures), data extraction, and risk of bias assessment of studies published between 01-1980 and 10-2021 on Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science (WOS) were performed independently by two reviewers. CT findings with pooled diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) with 95% confidence intervals, not including 1, were considered as informative. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy for CT findings were calculated by using a bivariate random-effects model and heterogeneity sources were evaluated. Ten studies with a total of 252 patients with and 846 without empyema were included. From 119 overlapping descriptors, five informative CT findings were identified: Pleural enhancement, thickening, loculation, fat thickening, and fat stranding with an AUC of 0.80 (hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic, HSROC). Potential sources of heterogeneity were different thresholds, empyema prevalence, and study year. MDPI 2021-12-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8778997/ /pubmed/35049844 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8010003 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Zettinig, Desiree D’Antonoli, Tugba Akinci Wilder-Smith, Adrian Bremerich, Jens Roth, Jan A. Sexauer, Raphael Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title | Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Findings in Pleural Empyema: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | diagnostic accuracy of imaging findings in pleural empyema: systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8778997/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35049844 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jimaging8010003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zettinigdesiree diagnosticaccuracyofimagingfindingsinpleuralempyemasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT dantonolitugbaakinci diagnosticaccuracyofimagingfindingsinpleuralempyemasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wildersmithadrian diagnosticaccuracyofimagingfindingsinpleuralempyemasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT bremerichjens diagnosticaccuracyofimagingfindingsinpleuralempyemasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT rothjana diagnosticaccuracyofimagingfindingsinpleuralempyemasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sexauerraphael diagnosticaccuracyofimagingfindingsinpleuralempyemasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |