Dataset Information

Assessing different diagnostic tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background:The aim of the current systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to assess the diagnostic characteristics of the gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire (GERDQ), proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) test, baseline impedance, mucosal impedance, dilated intercellular spaces (DIS), salivary pepsin, esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Methods:We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register database (from inception to 10 April 2018) for studies assessing the diagnostic characteristics of the GERDQ, PPI test, baseline impedance, mucosal impedance, DIS, or salivary pepsin and esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring/endoscopy in patients with GERD. Direct pairwise comparison and a NMA using Bayesian methods under random effects were performed. We also assessed the ranking probability. Results:A total of 40 studies were identified. The NMA found no significant difference among the baseline impedance, mucosal impedance, and esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy in terms of both sensitivity and specificity. It was also demonstrated that the salivary pepsin detected by the Peptest device had comparable specificity to esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy. Results of ranking probability indicated that esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy had highest sensitivity and specificity, followed by mucosal impedance and baseline impedance, whereas GERDQ had the lowest sensitivity and PPI test had the lowest specificity. Conclusions:In a systematic review and NMA of studies of patients with GERD, we found that baseline impedance and mucosal impedance have relatively high diagnostic performance, similar to esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy.

SUBMITTER: Zhang M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6876191 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing different diagnostic tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Zhang Mengyu M Pandolfino John E JE Zhou Xuyu X Tan Niandi N Li Yuwen Y Chen Minhu M Xiao Yinglian Y

Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology 20191121

<h4>Background</h4>The aim of the current systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to assess the diagnostic characteristics of the gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire (GERDQ), proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) test, baseline impedance, mucosal impedance, dilated intercellular spaces (DIS), salivary pepsin, esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).<h4>Methods</h4>We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register da ...[more]

PMID: 31803253

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), which leads to acid reflux into the esophagus, is a common gastrointestinal disorder. Several studies have shown the prevalence of GERD in Iranian population, but their evidence is contradictory. Therefore, the present study was conducted to investigate the epidemiology of GERD in Iran.MethodsThe entire steps of this systematic review and meta-analysis were based on the MOOSE protocol, and the results were reported accordance with the PRISMA guideline. This review is registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020142861). To find potentially relevant published articles, comprehensive search was done on international online databases Scopus, Science Direct, EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Iranian online databases and the Google Scholar search engine in June 2019. Cochran test and I2 index were used to assess the heterogeneity of the studies. Data were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software ver. 2. The significance level of the test was considered to be P < 0.05.ResultsThe daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of GERD symptoms in Iranian population was 5.64% (95%CI [confidence interval]: 3.77-8.35%; N = 66,398), 12.50% (95%CI: 9.63-16.08%; N = 110,388), 18.62% (95%CI: 12.90-26.12%; N = 70,749) and 43.07% (95%CI: 35.00-51.53%; N = 73,189), respectively. The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of heartburn in Iranian population was 2.46% (95%CI: 0.93-6.39%; N = 18,774), 9.52% (95%CI: 6.16-14.41%; N = 54,125), 8.19% (95%CI: 2.42-24.30%; N = 19,363) and 23.20% (95%CI: 13.56-36.79%; N = 26,543), respectively. The daily, weekly, monthly, and overall prevalence of regurgitation in Iranian population was 4.00% (95%CI: 1.88-8.32%; N = 18,774), 9.79% (95%CI: 5.99-15.60%; N = 41,140), 13.76% (95%CI: 6.18-44.31%; N = 19,363) and 36.53% (95%CI: 19.30-58.08%; N = 21,174), respectively. The sensitivity analysis for prevalence of all types GERD, heartburn and regurgitation symptoms by removing a study showed that the overall estimate is still robust.ConclusionThe present meta-analysis provides comprehensive and useful information on the epidemiology of GERD in Iran for policy-makers and health care providers. This study showed a high prevalence of GERD in Iran. Therefore, effective measures on GERD-related factors such as lifestyle can be among the health policies of Iran.

Project description:BackgroundTo overcome the limitations of conventional malaria rapid diagnostic tests (cRDTs) in diagnosing malaria in patients with low parasitaemia, ultrasensitive malaria rapid diagnostic tests (uRDTs) have recently been developed, with promising results under laboratory conditions. The current study is the first meta-analysis comparing the overall sensitivity, and specificity of newly developed ultrasensitive Plasmodium falciparum malaria RDT (Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT) with the cRDT conducted in the same field conditions.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane infectious diseases group specialized register, and African Journals Online (AJOL) were searched up to 20th April 2021. Studies with enough data to compute sensitivity and specificity of uRDT and cRDT were retrieved. A random-effect model for meta-analysis was used to obtain the pooled sensitivity and specificity.ResultsOverall, 15 data sets from 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall sensitivity of the Alere™ ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants, was 55.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45.5; 65.0), while the sensitivity regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants, was 42.9% (95% CI: 31.5; 55.2) for the cRDT performed in the same field conditions. When PCR was used as reference test, the sensitivity of uRDT was 60.4% (95% CI: 50.8; 69.2), while the sensitivity was 49.4% (95% CI: 38.2; 60.6) for the cRDT. The pooled specificity of uRDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants was 98.6% (95% CI: 97.1; 99.4), and the pooled specificity of cRDT regardless of the reference test and the clinical presentation of participants was 99.3% (95% CI: 98.1; 99.7). When PCR was used as reference test the specificity of uRDT and cRDT was 97.5% (95% CI: 94.1; 98.9) and 98.2% (95% CI: 95.5; 99.3). Regardless of the reference test used, the sensitivity of Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT in symptomatic patients was 72.1% (95%CI: 67.4; 76.4), while sensitivity of cRDT was 67.4% (95%CI: 57.6; 75.9).ConclusionFindings of the meta-analysis show that Alere™ Ultra-sensitive Malaria Ag P. falciparum RDT compared to cRDT performed in the same field conditions has higher sensitivity but lower specificity although the difference is not statistically significant.

Dataset Information

Assessing different diagnostic tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Publications

Assessing different diagnostic tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets