Giant Cell Arteritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Test Accuracy and Benefits and Harms of Common Treatments.

Abstract

This paper by Dua and colleagues (ACR open rheumatology, 3(7), 429–441. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr2. 11226, published 02 April 2021) has been corrected to account for an error in the data abstraction regarding the use of ultrasound in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis (GCA). Some studies informing this question were missed in error and not analyzed after being included in the full text screening of the articles (Table 1). When the test accuracy results from the missing studies were used, the estimated pooled sensitivity for temporal ultrasound was 0.62 (0.43; 0.77) and specificity was 0.85 (0.76, 0.91) when compared with temporal artery biopsy histology. These findings are illustrated in figure 1 and 2. This correction does not change the findings of the original publication as the prior reported results showed that the test accuracy of a halo sign on ultrasound for diagnosing GCA showed a sensitivity of 40% to 67% and a specificity