诊断糖尿病足骨髓炎的生物标志物的更新:荟萃分析和系统综述

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 CELL BIOLOGY Wound Repair and Regeneration Pub Date : 2024-04-03 DOI:10.1111/wrr.13174
Elizabeth A. Ansert, Arthur N. Tarricone, Tyler L. Coye, Peter A. Crisologo, David Truong, Mehmet A. Suludere, Lawrence A. Lavery
{"title":"诊断糖尿病足骨髓炎的生物标志物的更新:荟萃分析和系统综述","authors":"Elizabeth A. Ansert, Arthur N. Tarricone, Tyler L. Coye, Peter A. Crisologo, David Truong, Mehmet A. Suludere, Lawrence A. Lavery","doi":"10.1111/wrr.13174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic characteristics of biomarker for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Medline for studies who report serological markers and DFO before December 2022. Studies must include at least one of the following diagnostic parameters for biomarkers: area under the curve, sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive value, negative predictive value. Two authors evaluated quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. We included 19 papers. In this systematic review, there were 2854 subjects with 2134 (74.8%) of those patients being included in the meta‐analysis. The most common biomarkers were erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C‐reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT). A meta‐analysis was then performed where data were evaluated with Forrest plots and receiver operating characteristic curves. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 and 0.75 for PCT, 0.72 and 0.76 for CRP and 0.70 and 0.77 for ESR. Pooled area under the curves for ESR, CRP and PCT were 0.83, 0.77 and 0.71, respectfully. Average diagnostic odds ratios were 16.1 (range 3.6–55.4), 14.3 (range 2.7–48.7) and 6.7 (range 3.6–10.4) for ESR, CRP and PCT, respectfully. None of the biomarkers we evaluated could be rated as ‘outstanding’ to diagnose osteomyelitis. Based on the areas under the curve, ESR is an ‘excellent’ biomarker to detect osteomyelitis, and CRP and PCT are ‘acceptable’ biomarkers to diagnose osteomyelitis. Diagnostic odds ratios indicate that ESR, CRP and PCT are ‘good’ or ‘very good’ tools to identify osteomyelitis.","PeriodicalId":23864,"journal":{"name":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Update of biomarkers to diagnose diabetic foot osteomyelitis: A meta‐analysis and systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth A. Ansert, Arthur N. Tarricone, Tyler L. Coye, Peter A. Crisologo, David Truong, Mehmet A. Suludere, Lawrence A. Lavery\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/wrr.13174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic characteristics of biomarker for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Medline for studies who report serological markers and DFO before December 2022. Studies must include at least one of the following diagnostic parameters for biomarkers: area under the curve, sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive value, negative predictive value. Two authors evaluated quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. We included 19 papers. In this systematic review, there were 2854 subjects with 2134 (74.8%) of those patients being included in the meta‐analysis. The most common biomarkers were erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C‐reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT). A meta‐analysis was then performed where data were evaluated with Forrest plots and receiver operating characteristic curves. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 and 0.75 for PCT, 0.72 and 0.76 for CRP and 0.70 and 0.77 for ESR. Pooled area under the curves for ESR, CRP and PCT were 0.83, 0.77 and 0.71, respectfully. Average diagnostic odds ratios were 16.1 (range 3.6–55.4), 14.3 (range 2.7–48.7) and 6.7 (range 3.6–10.4) for ESR, CRP and PCT, respectfully. None of the biomarkers we evaluated could be rated as ‘outstanding’ to diagnose osteomyelitis. Based on the areas under the curve, ESR is an ‘excellent’ biomarker to detect osteomyelitis, and CRP and PCT are ‘acceptable’ biomarkers to diagnose osteomyelitis. Diagnostic odds ratios indicate that ESR, CRP and PCT are ‘good’ or ‘very good’ tools to identify osteomyelitis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Wound Repair and Regeneration\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Wound Repair and Regeneration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.13174\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CELL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.13174","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在评估糖尿病足骨髓炎(DFO)生物标志物的诊断特征。我们在PubMed、Scopus、Embase和Medline上搜索了2022年12月之前报告血清学标记物和DFO的研究。研究必须至少包括以下一项生物标记物诊断参数:曲线下面积、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值。两位作者使用诊断准确性研究质量评估工具对研究质量进行了评估。我们共纳入了 19 篇论文。在这篇系统综述中,共有2854名受试者,其中2134名(74.8%)患者被纳入荟萃分析。最常见的生物标记物是红细胞沉降率(ESR)、C反应蛋白(CRP)和降钙素原(PCT)。然后进行了荟萃分析,利用福斯特图和接收器工作特征曲线对数据进行了评估。PCT 的集合敏感性和特异性分别为 0.72 和 0.75,CRP 为 0.72 和 0.76,ESR 为 0.70 和 0.77。血沉、CRP 和 PCT 的集合曲线下面积分别为 0.83、0.77 和 0.71。血沉、CRP 和 PCT 的平均诊断几率分别为 16.1(范围 3.6-55.4)、14.3(范围 2.7-48.7)和 6.7(范围 3.6-10.4)。在诊断骨髓炎方面,我们所评估的生物标志物中没有一个能被评为 "优秀"。根据曲线下面积,血沉是检测骨髓炎的 "优秀 "生物标志物,而 CRP 和 PCT 是诊断骨髓炎的 "可接受 "生物标志物。诊断几率比表明,血沉、CRP 和 PCT 是识别骨髓炎的 "良好 "或 "非常好 "的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Update of biomarkers to diagnose diabetic foot osteomyelitis: A meta‐analysis and systematic review
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic characteristics of biomarker for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Medline for studies who report serological markers and DFO before December 2022. Studies must include at least one of the following diagnostic parameters for biomarkers: area under the curve, sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive value, negative predictive value. Two authors evaluated quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. We included 19 papers. In this systematic review, there were 2854 subjects with 2134 (74.8%) of those patients being included in the meta‐analysis. The most common biomarkers were erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C‐reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT). A meta‐analysis was then performed where data were evaluated with Forrest plots and receiver operating characteristic curves. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 and 0.75 for PCT, 0.72 and 0.76 for CRP and 0.70 and 0.77 for ESR. Pooled area under the curves for ESR, CRP and PCT were 0.83, 0.77 and 0.71, respectfully. Average diagnostic odds ratios were 16.1 (range 3.6–55.4), 14.3 (range 2.7–48.7) and 6.7 (range 3.6–10.4) for ESR, CRP and PCT, respectfully. None of the biomarkers we evaluated could be rated as ‘outstanding’ to diagnose osteomyelitis. Based on the areas under the curve, ESR is an ‘excellent’ biomarker to detect osteomyelitis, and CRP and PCT are ‘acceptable’ biomarkers to diagnose osteomyelitis. Diagnostic odds ratios indicate that ESR, CRP and PCT are ‘good’ or ‘very good’ tools to identify osteomyelitis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Wound Repair and Regeneration
Wound Repair and Regeneration 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
71
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Wound Repair and Regeneration provides extensive international coverage of cellular and molecular biology, connective tissue, and biological mediator studies in the field of tissue repair and regeneration and serves a diverse audience of surgeons, plastic surgeons, dermatologists, biochemists, cell biologists, and others. Wound Repair and Regeneration is the official journal of The Wound Healing Society, The European Tissue Repair Society, The Japanese Society for Wound Healing, and The Australian Wound Management Association.
期刊最新文献
Effects of a bioengineered allogeneic cellular construct on burn-related macrophage phenotype. Digital ulcers associated with scleroderma: A major unmet medical need. Novel multi-spectral short-wave infrared imaging for assessment of human burn wound depth. Vitabiotic: An alternative approach to diabetic foot. Skin metabolism in obesity: A narrative review.
×
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