首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Accuracy of Lung Ultrasonography versus Chest Radiography for the Diagnosis of Adult Community-Acquired Pneumonia: Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis
【2h】

Accuracy of Lung Ultrasonography versus Chest Radiography for the Diagnosis of Adult Community-Acquired Pneumonia: Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

机译:肺超声与胸部X线检查对成人社区获得性肺炎的诊断准确性:文献和荟萃分析的回顾。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Lung ultrasonography (LUS) is being increasingly utilized in emergency and critical settings. We performed a systematic review of the current literature to compare the accuracy of LUS and chest radiography (CR) for the diagnosis of adult community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We searched in Pub Med, EMBASE dealing with both LUS and CR for diagnosis of adult CAP, and conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of LUS in comparison with CR. The diagnostic standard that the index test compared was the hospital discharge diagnosis or the result of chest computed tomography scan as a “gold standard”. We calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity using the Mantel-Haenszel method and pooled diagnostic odds ratio using the DerSimonian-Laird method. Five articles met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Using hospital discharge diagnosis as reference, LUS had a pooled sensitivity of 0.95 (0.93-0.97) and a specificity of 0.90 (0.86 to 0.94), CR had a pooled sensitivity of 0.77 (0.73 to 0.80) and a specificity of 0.91 (0.87 to 0.94). LUS and CR compared with computed tomography scan in 138 patients in total, the Z statistic of the two summary receiver operating characteristic was 3.093 (P = 0.002), the areas under the curve for LUS and CR were 0.901 and 0.590, respectively. Our study indicates that LUS can help to diagnosis adult CAP by clinicians and the accuracy was better compared with CR using chest computed tomography scan as the gold standard.
机译:肺部超声检查(LUS)越来越多地用于紧急情况和危急情况。我们对当前文献进行了系统的综述,以比较LUS和胸部X线摄影(CR)在诊断成人社区获得性肺炎(CAP)中的准确性。我们在Pub Med,EMBASE中搜索LUS和CR,以诊断成人CAP,并进行了荟萃分析,以评估LUS与CR的诊断准确性。指标测试比较的诊断标准是出院诊断或胸部计算机断层扫描结果作为“金标准”。我们使用Mantel-Haenszel方法计算了合并的敏感性和特异性,并使用DerSimonian-Laird方法计算了合并的诊断比值比。五篇文章符合我们的纳入标准,并被纳入最终分析。以出院诊断为参考,LUS的综合敏感性为0.95(0.93-0.97),特异性为0.90(0.86至0.94),CR的综合敏感性为0.77(0.73至0.80),特异性为0.91(0.87至0.87)。 0.94)。 LUS和CR与计算机X线断层扫描相比,总共138例患者,两个摘要接收器操作特征的Z统计量为3.093(P = 0.002),LUS和CR的曲线下面积分别为0.901和0.590。我们的研究表明,LUS可以帮助临床医生诊断成人CAP,与以胸部计算机断层扫描为金标准的CR相比,其准确性更高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号