Cargando…

Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND: The Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examination using conventional ultrasound has limited utility for detecting solid organ injury. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compares the performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to conventional ult...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sutarjono, Bayu, Kessel, Matthew, Alexander, Dorian, Grewal, Ekjot
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9881326/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36703099
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-023-00771-4
_version_ 1784879087498559488
author Sutarjono, Bayu
Kessel, Matthew
Alexander, Dorian
Grewal, Ekjot
author_facet Sutarjono, Bayu
Kessel, Matthew
Alexander, Dorian
Grewal, Ekjot
author_sort Sutarjono, Bayu
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examination using conventional ultrasound has limited utility for detecting solid organ injury. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compares the performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to conventional ultrasound when used as the initial assessment for abdominal trauma prior to computed tomography (CT) imaging. METHODS: A systematic literature search of major databases was conducted of human studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of conventional ultrasound and CEUS occurring prior to CT imaging for abdominal trauma. The study followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The quality of studies was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) tool. Paired pooled sensitivity and specificity between conventional ultrasound and CEUS were compared using data extracted from the eligible studies. Diagnostic odds ratio, number needed to diagnose values, and likelihood ratios were also determined. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. More than half of the included studies demonstrated low risk of bias. Using McNemar’s test to assess for paired binary observations, we found that CEUS had statistically higher sensitivity (0.933 vs. 0.559; two-tailed, P < 0.001) and specificity (0.995 vs. 0.979; two-tailed, P < 0.001) than conventional ultrasound in the setting of abdominal trauma, respectively. When divided into particular findings of clinical interest, CEUS had statistically higher sensitivity than conventional ultrasound in screening for active bleeding and injuries to all abdominal solid organs. CEUS also had superior diagnostic odds ratios, number needed to diagnose values, and likelihood ratios than conventional ultrasound. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic value of CEUS was higher than that of conventional ultrasound for differentiating traumatic abdominal injuries when used as the initial assessment in the emergency department. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-023-00771-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9881326
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98813262023-01-28 Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma Sutarjono, Bayu Kessel, Matthew Alexander, Dorian Grewal, Ekjot BMC Emerg Med Research BACKGROUND: The Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examination using conventional ultrasound has limited utility for detecting solid organ injury. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compares the performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to conventional ultrasound when used as the initial assessment for abdominal trauma prior to computed tomography (CT) imaging. METHODS: A systematic literature search of major databases was conducted of human studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of conventional ultrasound and CEUS occurring prior to CT imaging for abdominal trauma. The study followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The quality of studies was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) tool. Paired pooled sensitivity and specificity between conventional ultrasound and CEUS were compared using data extracted from the eligible studies. Diagnostic odds ratio, number needed to diagnose values, and likelihood ratios were also determined. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. More than half of the included studies demonstrated low risk of bias. Using McNemar’s test to assess for paired binary observations, we found that CEUS had statistically higher sensitivity (0.933 vs. 0.559; two-tailed, P < 0.001) and specificity (0.995 vs. 0.979; two-tailed, P < 0.001) than conventional ultrasound in the setting of abdominal trauma, respectively. When divided into particular findings of clinical interest, CEUS had statistically higher sensitivity than conventional ultrasound in screening for active bleeding and injuries to all abdominal solid organs. CEUS also had superior diagnostic odds ratios, number needed to diagnose values, and likelihood ratios than conventional ultrasound. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic value of CEUS was higher than that of conventional ultrasound for differentiating traumatic abdominal injuries when used as the initial assessment in the emergency department. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-023-00771-4. BioMed Central 2023-01-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9881326/ /pubmed/36703099 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-023-00771-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Sutarjono, Bayu
Kessel, Matthew
Alexander, Dorian
Grewal, Ekjot
Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma
title Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma
title_full Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma
title_fullStr Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma
title_full_unstemmed Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma
title_short Is it time to re-think FAST? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma
title_sort is it time to re-think fast? a systematic review and meta-analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (ceus) and conventional ultrasound for initial assessment of abdominal trauma
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9881326/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36703099
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-023-00771-4
work_keys_str_mv AT sutarjonobayu isittimetorethinkfastasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcontrastenhancedultrasoundceusandconventionalultrasoundforinitialassessmentofabdominaltrauma
AT kesselmatthew isittimetorethinkfastasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcontrastenhancedultrasoundceusandconventionalultrasoundforinitialassessmentofabdominaltrauma
AT alexanderdorian isittimetorethinkfastasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcontrastenhancedultrasoundceusandconventionalultrasoundforinitialassessmentofabdominaltrauma
AT grewalekjot isittimetorethinkfastasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcontrastenhancedultrasoundceusandconventionalultrasoundforinitialassessmentofabdominaltrauma