Diagnostic performance of ultrasound in acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE World Journal of Emergency Surgery Pub Date : 2023-11-30 DOI:10.1186/s13017-023-00524-5
Sih-Shiang Huang, Kai-Wei Lin, Kao-Lang Liu, Yao-Ming Wu, Wan-Ching Lien, Hsiu-Po Wang
{"title":"Diagnostic performance of ultrasound in acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Sih-Shiang Huang, Kai-Wei Lin, Kao-Lang Liu, Yao-Ming Wu, Wan-Ching Lien, Hsiu-Po Wang","doi":"10.1186/s13017-023-00524-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An updated overview of ultrasound (US) for diagnosis of acute cholecystitis (AC) remains lacking. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of US for AC. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We meticulously screened articles from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, spanning from inception to August 2023. We employed the search strategy combining the keywords \"bedside US\", \"emergency US\" or \"point-of-care US\" with \"AC\". Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts of the retrieved articles to identify suitable studies. The inclusion criteria encompassed articles investigating the diagnostic performance of US for AC. Data regarding diagnostic performance, sonographers, and sonographic findings including the presence of gallstone, gallbladder (GB) wall thickness, peri-GB fluid, or sonographic Murphy sign were extracted, and a meta-analysis was executed. Case reports, editorials, and review articles were excluded, as well as studies focused on acalculous cholecystitis. The study quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Forty studies with 8,652 patients were included. The majority of studies had a low risk of bias and applicability concerns. US had a pooled sensitivity of 71% (95% CI, 69–72%), a specificity of 85% (95% CI, 84–86%), and an accuracy of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.82–0.83) for the diagnosis of AC. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 71% (95% CI, 67–74%) and 92% (95% CI, 90–93%) performed by emergency physicians (EPs), 79% (95% CI, 71–85%) and 76% (95% CI, 69–81%) performed by surgeons, and 68% (95% CI 66–71%) and 87% (95% CI, 86–88%) performed by radiologists, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups. US is a good imaging modality for the diagnosis of AC. EP-performed US has a similar diagnostic performance to radiologist-performed US. Further investigations would be needed to investigate the impact of US on expediting the management process and improving patient-centered outcomes.","PeriodicalId":48867,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Emergency Surgery","volume":"120 15","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-023-00524-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An updated overview of ultrasound (US) for diagnosis of acute cholecystitis (AC) remains lacking. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of US for AC. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We meticulously screened articles from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, spanning from inception to August 2023. We employed the search strategy combining the keywords "bedside US", "emergency US" or "point-of-care US" with "AC". Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts of the retrieved articles to identify suitable studies. The inclusion criteria encompassed articles investigating the diagnostic performance of US for AC. Data regarding diagnostic performance, sonographers, and sonographic findings including the presence of gallstone, gallbladder (GB) wall thickness, peri-GB fluid, or sonographic Murphy sign were extracted, and a meta-analysis was executed. Case reports, editorials, and review articles were excluded, as well as studies focused on acalculous cholecystitis. The study quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Forty studies with 8,652 patients were included. The majority of studies had a low risk of bias and applicability concerns. US had a pooled sensitivity of 71% (95% CI, 69–72%), a specificity of 85% (95% CI, 84–86%), and an accuracy of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.82–0.83) for the diagnosis of AC. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 71% (95% CI, 67–74%) and 92% (95% CI, 90–93%) performed by emergency physicians (EPs), 79% (95% CI, 71–85%) and 76% (95% CI, 69–81%) performed by surgeons, and 68% (95% CI 66–71%) and 87% (95% CI, 86–88%) performed by radiologists, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups. US is a good imaging modality for the diagnosis of AC. EP-performed US has a similar diagnostic performance to radiologist-performed US. Further investigations would be needed to investigate the impact of US on expediting the management process and improving patient-centered outcomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超声在急性胆囊炎诊断中的表现:系统回顾和荟萃分析
超声(US)诊断急性胆囊炎(AC)的最新概述仍然缺乏。本系统评价是为了评估US对AC的诊断性能。系统评价是按照PRISMA指南进行的。我们精心筛选了MEDLINE, Embase和Cochrane图书馆从成立到2023年8月的文章。我们采用了将关键词“床边美国”、“紧急美国”或“护理点美国”与“AC”结合起来的搜索策略。两位审稿人独立筛选检索文章的标题和摘要,以确定合适的研究。纳入标准包括研究US对AC诊断性能的文章。提取有关诊断性能、超声检查和超声检查结果的数据,包括胆囊结石、胆囊(GB)壁厚、GB周围液体或超声墨菲征的存在,并进行meta分析。病例报告、社论和综述文章以及聚焦于无结石性胆囊炎的研究被排除在外。采用诊断准确性研究质量评估-2 (QUADAS-2)工具评估研究质量。纳入了40项研究,8,652例患者。大多数研究存在低偏倚风险和适用性问题。US诊断AC的总灵敏度为71% (95% CI, 69-72%),特异性为85% (95% CI, 84-86%),准确性为0.83 (95% CI, 0.82-0.83)。急诊医生(EPs)的总灵敏度和特异性分别为71% (95% CI, 67-74%)和92% (95% CI, 90-93%),外科医生的总灵敏度和特异性分别为79% (95% CI, 71-85%)和76% (95% CI, 69-81%),放射科医生的总灵敏度和特异性分别为68% (95% CI, 66-71%)和87% (95% CI, 86-88%)。三组间差异无统计学意义。超声是诊断AC的一种很好的成像方式。ep超声与放射科超声的诊断效果相似。需要进一步的调查来调查US对加快管理过程和改善以患者为中心的结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Emergency Surgery
World Journal of Emergency Surgery EMERGENCY MEDICINE-SURGERY
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
60
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The World Journal of Emergency Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal covering all facets of clinical and basic research in traumatic and non-traumatic emergency surgery and related fields. Topics include emergency surgery, acute care surgery, trauma surgery, intensive care, trauma management, and resuscitation, among others.
期刊最新文献
International cross-sectional survey on current and updated definitions of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. Prophylactic PICO◊ dressing shortens wound dressing requirements post emergency laparotomy (EL-PICO◊ trial) A new technology for medical and surgical data organisation: the WSES-WJES Decentralised Knowledge Graph Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) enhances hemodynamic stability decreasing analgesic requirements in surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) Ultra minimally invasive surgical stabilization of Rib fractures (uMI-SSRF): reduction and fixation techniques to minimize the surgical wound
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1