首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Diagnostic testing for celiac disease among patients with abdominal symptoms: a systematic review.
【24h】

Diagnostic testing for celiac disease among patients with abdominal symptoms: a systematic review.

机译:腹部症状患者的腹腔疾病诊断测试:系统评价。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

CONTEXT: The symptoms and consequences of celiac disease usually resolve with a lifelong gluten-free diet. However, clinical presentation is variable and most patients presenting with abdominal symptoms in primary care will not have celiac disease and unnecessary diagnostic testing should be avoided. OBJECTIVE: To summarize evidence on the performance of diagnostic tests for identifying celiac disease in adults presenting with abdominal symptoms in primary care or similar settings. DATA SOURCES: A literature search via MEDLINE (beginning in January 1966) and EMBASE (beginning in January 1947) through December 2009 and a manual search of references for additional relevant studies. STUDY SELECTION: Diagnostic studies were selected if they had a cohort or nested case-control design, enrolled adults presenting with nonacute abdominal symptoms, the prevalence of celiac disease was 15% or less, and the tests used included gastrointestinal symptoms or serum antibody tests. DATA EXTRACTION: Quality assessment using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool and data extraction were performed by 2 reviewers independently. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated for each study and pooled estimates were computed using bivariate analysis if there was clinical and statistical homogeneity. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixteen studies were included in the review (N = 6085 patients). The performance of abdominal symptoms varied widely. The sensitivity of diarrhea, for example, ranged from 0.27 to 0.86 and specificity from 0.21 to 0.86. Pooled estimates for IgA antiendomysial antibodies (8 studies) were 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-0.95) for sensitivity and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-1.00) for specificity (positive likelihood ratio [LR] of 171 and negative LR of 0.11). Pooled estimates for IgA antitissue transglutaminase antibodies (7 studies) were 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82-0.94) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.95-0.99), respectively (positive LR of 37.7 and negative LR of 0.11). The IgA and IgG antigliadin antibodies showed variable results, especially for sensitivity (range, 0.46-0.87 and range, 0.25-0.93, respectively). One recent study using diamidated gliadin peptides showed good specificity (> or = 0.94), but evidence is limited in this target population. CONCLUSION: Among adult patients presenting with abdominal symptoms in primary care or other unselected populations, IgA antitissue transglutaminase antibodies and IgA antiendomysial antibodies have high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing celiac disease.
机译:背景:腹腔疾病的症状和后果通常可通过终生无麸质饮食解决。但是,临床表现是可变的,在初级保健中出现腹部症状的大多数患者不会患有乳糜泻,应避免不必要的诊断测试。目的:总结关于在初级保健机构或类似机构中表现出腹部症状的成人进行乳糜泻诊断测试的证据。数据来源:截止到2009年12月,通过MEDLINE(始于1966年1月)和EMBASE(始于1947年1月)进行文献检索,并通过人工方式搜索了其他相关研究的参考文献。研究选择:如果诊断研究采用队列研究或巢式病例对照设计,入组患者表现为非急性腹部症状,腹腔疾病的患病率为15%或以下,并且所用的测试包括胃肠道症状或血清抗体测试,则选择诊断研究。数据提取:使用诊断准确性研究质量评估工具进行质量评估,并由2位审阅者分别进行数据提取。如果存在临床和统计上的同质性,则对每项研究计算敏感性和特异性,并使用双变量分析计算合并的估计值。数据综合:本评价纳入了16项研究(N = 6085例患者)。腹部症状的表现差异很大。例如,腹泻的敏感性为0.27至0.86,特异性为0.21至0.86。 IgA抗肌内膜抗体的汇总估计(8个研究)的敏感性为0.90(95%置信区间[CI],0.80-0.95),特异性为0.99(95%CI,0.98-1.00)(正似然比[LR]为171和负LR为0.11)。 IgA抗组织转谷氨酰胺酶抗体的汇总估计(7个研究)分别为0.89(95%CI,0.82-0.94)和0.98(95%CI,0.95-0.99)(阳性LR为37.7,阴性LR为0.11)。 IgA和IgG抗麦醇溶蛋白抗体显示出可变的结果,尤其是在敏感性方面(分别为0.46-0.87和0.25-0.93)。最近的一项使用二酰胺化麦醇溶蛋白肽的研究显示出良好的特异性(>或= 0.94),但是在该目标人群中证据有限。结论:在初级保健或其他未选人群中出现腹部症状的成年患者中,IgA抗组织转谷氨酰胺酶抗体和IgA抗内膜肌抗体对乳糜泻的诊断具有很高的敏感性和特异性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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