Dataset Information

Accuracy of circulating microRNAs in diagnosis of sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Objectives: The aim of this study was to systematically assess the accuracy of circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) as a promising biomarker for sepsis via a meta-analysis.

Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid databases were searched up to April 3, 2020. The Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess methodological quality. The pooled sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive or negative likelihood ratios (PLR or NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), curve, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The overall accuracy (OA) of miRNAs, procalcitonin (PCT), and C-reactive protein (CRP) was analyzed by the chi-square test.

Results: A total of 22 records were eligible for systematic review, including 2210 sepsis, 426 systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), and 1076 healthy controls (HC). The pooled Sen, Spe, and DOR of miRNAs were 0.80 (95% CI 0.75-0.83), 0.85 (95% CI 0.80-0.89), and 22 (15-32), respectively. The DOR of PCT and CRP were 17 (95% CI 4-68) and 7 (95% CI 1-48), respectively. The OA value of miRNAs (79.02%) and PCT (76.95%) were higher than CRP (61.22%) (P < 0.000). The subgroup analysis indicated that miRNAs in adults, serum type, downregulation of miRNA expression, criteria of Sepsis-3, internal reference of non-U6, and dysregulation expression of miR-223 had superior diagnostic accuracy. In addition, there was no significant publication bias among the included studies. Fagan's nomogram showed valuable clinical utility.

Conclusions: Our meta-analysis indicated that the level of circulating miRNAs, particularly the miR-223, could be used as an indicator for sepsis.

SUBMITTER: Shen X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7607638 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accuracy of circulating microRNAs in diagnosis of sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Shen Xiaomin X Zhang Jiajie J Huang Yicheng Y Tong Jiepeng J Zhang Li L Zhang Zhijuan Z Yu Wei W Qiu Yunqing Y

Journal of intensive care 20201102 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this study was to systematically assess the accuracy of circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) as a promising biomarker for sepsis via a meta-analysis.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid databases were searched up to April 3, 2020. The Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess methodological quality. The pooled sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive or negative likelihood ratios (PLR or NLR), diag ...[more]

PMID: 33292630

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveIt's difficult to differentiate sepsis from non-sepsis, especially non-infectious SIRS, because no good standard exists for proof of infection. Soluble CD14 subtype (sCD14-ST), recently re-named presepsin, was identified as a new marker for the diagnosis of sepsis in several reports. However, the findings were based on the results of individual clinical trials, rather than a comprehensive and overall estimation. Thus, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled accuracy of presepsin in patients with sepsis suspect.MethodsA comprehensive electronic search was performed via internet retrieval system up to 15 December 2014. Methodological quality assessment was applied by using the QUADAS2 tool. The diagnostic value of presepsin in sepsis was evaluated by using the pooled estimate of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio, as well as summary receiver operating characteristics curve.ResultsNine studies with 10 trials and 2159 cases were included in the study. Only two trials had low concerns regarding applicability, whereas all trials were deemed to be at high risk of bias. Heterogeneity existed in the non-threshold effect, but not in the threshold effect. The pooled sensitivity of presepsin for sepsis was 0.78 (0.76-0.80), pooled specificity was 0.83 (0.80-0.85), pooled positive likelihood ratio was 4.63 (3.27-6.55), pooled negative likelihood ratio was 0.22 (0.16-0.30), and pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 21.73 (12.81-36.86). The area under curve of summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.89 (95%CI: 0.84 to 0.94) and Q* index was 0.82 (95%CI: 0.77 to 0.87).ConclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrates that presepsin had some superiority in the management of patients, and may be a helpful and valuable biomarker in early diagnosis of sepsis. However, presepsin showed a moderate diagnostic accuracy in differentiating sepsis from non-sepsis which prevented it from being recommended as a definitive test for diagnosing sepsis in isolation, but the results should be interpreted cautiously.

Project description:Muscle ultrasound is an emerging tool for diagnosing sarcopenia. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on the diagnostic test accuracy of ultrasound for the diagnosis of sarcopenia. We collected data from Ovid Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Diagnostic test accuracy studies using muscle ultrasound to detect sarcopenia were included. Bivariate random-effects models based on sensitivity and specificity pairs were used to calculate the pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curves (AUCs) of summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC), if possible. We screened 7332 publications and included 17 studies with 2143 participants (mean age range: 52.6-82.8 years). All included studies had a high risk of bias. The study populations, reference standards and ultrasound measurement methods varied across the studies. Lower extremity muscles were commonly studied, whereas muscle thickness (MT) was the most widely measured parameter, followed by the cross-sectional area (CSA). The MTs of the gastrocnemius, rectus femoris, tibialis anterior, soleus, rectus abdominis and geniohyoid muscles showed a moderate diagnostic accuracy for sarcopenia (SROC-AUC 0.83, 8 studies; SROC-AUC 0.78, 5 studies; AUC 0.82, 1 study; AUC 0.76-0.78, 2 studies; AUC 0.76, 1 study; and AUC 0.79, 1 study, respectively), whereas the MTs of vastus intermedius, quadriceps femoris and transversus abdominis muscles showed a low diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.67-0.71, 3 studies; SROC-AUC 0.64, 4 studies; and AUC 0.68, 1 study, respectively). The CSA of rectus femoris, biceps brachii muscles and gastrocnemius fascicle length also showed a moderate diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.70-0.90, 3 studies; 0.81, 1 study; and 0.78-0.80, 1 study, respectively), whereas the echo intensity (EI) of rectus femoris, vastus intermedius, quadriceps femoris and biceps brachii muscles showed a low diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.52-0.67, 2 studies; 0.48-0.50, 1 study; 0.43-0.49, 1 study; and 0.69, 1 study, respectively). The combination of CSA and EI of biceps brachii or rectus femoris muscles was better than either CSA or EI alone for diagnosing sarcopenia. Muscle ultrasound shows a low-to-moderate diagnostic test accuracy for sarcopenia diagnosis depending on different ultrasound parameters, measured muscles, reference standards and study populations. The combination of muscle quality indicators (e.g., EI) and muscle quantity indicators (e.g., MT) might provide better diagnostic test accuracy.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of self-diagnosis compared with a clinical diagnosis for common conditions in primary care.DesignSystematic review.Meta-analysisData sourcesMedline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CINAHL from inception to 25 January 2021.Study selectionEligible studies were prospective or retrospective studies comparing the results of self-diagnosis of common conditions in primary care to a relevant clinical diagnosis or laboratory reference standard test performed by a healthcare service provider. Studies that considered self-testing only were excluded.Data extractionTwo authors independently extracted data using a predefined data extraction form and assessed risk of bias using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.Methods and results5047 records identified 18 studies for inclusion covering the self-diagnosis of three common conditions: vaginal infection (five studies), common skin conditions (four studies) and HIV (nine studies). No studies were found for any other condition. For self-diagnosis of vaginal infection and common skin conditions, meta-analysis was not appropriate and data were reported narratively. Nine studies, using point-of-care oral fluid tests, reported on the accuracy of self-diagnosis of HIV and data were pooled using bivariate meta-analysis methods. For these nine studies, the pooled sensitivity was 92.8% (95% CI, 86% to 96.5%) and specificity was 99.8% (95% CI, 99.1% to 99.9%). Post hoc, the robustness of the pooled findings was tested in a sensitivity analysis only including four studies using laboratory testing as the reference standard. The pooled sensitivity reduced to 87.7% (95% CI, 81.4% to 92.2%) and the specificity remained the same. The quality of all 18 included studies was assessed as mixed and overall study methodology was not always well described.Conclusions and implications of key findingsOverall, there was a paucity of evidence. The current evidence does not support routine self-diagnosis for vaginal infections, common skin conditions and HIV in primary care.Prospero registration numberCRD42018110288.

Dataset Information

Accuracy of circulating microRNAs in diagnosis of sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Accuracy of circulating microRNAs in diagnosis of sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets