Impact of increasing sample volume from 4 ml to 8 ml on bacterial detection rates in apheresis platelets: a meta-analysis

Vox Sanguinis ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 (3) ◽  
pp. 318-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Bruhn ◽  
B. Custer ◽  
S. Vanderpool ◽  
M. Townsend ◽  
H. Kamel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sample Volume ◽  
Bacterial Detection ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Apheresis Platelets

scholarly journals Endotoxemia as a Diagnostic Tool for Patients with Suspected Bacteremia Caused by Gram-Negative Organisms: a Meta-Analysis of 4 Decades of Studies

2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 1183-1191 ◽  
Author(s):  
James C. Hurley ◽  
Piotr Nowak ◽  
Lars Öhrmalm ◽  
Charalambos Gogos ◽  
Apostolos Armaganidis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Gram Negative ◽  
Content Type ◽  
E Coli ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Gram Negative Organisms

The clinical significance of endotoxin detection in blood has been evaluated for a broad range of patient groups in over 40 studies published over 4 decades. The influences of Gram-negative (GN) bacteremia species type and patient inclusion criteria on endotoxemia detection rates in published studies remain unclear. Studies were identified after a literature search and manual reviews of article bibliographies, together with a direct approach to authors of potentially eligible studies for data clarifications. The concordance between GN bacteremia and endotoxemia expressed as the summary diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) was derived for three GN bacteremia categories across eligible studies by using a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) method. Forty-two studies met broad inclusion criteria, with between 2 and 173 GN bacteremias in each study. Among all 42 studies, the DORs (95% confidence interval) were 3.2 (1.7 to 6.0) and 5.8 (2.4 to 13.7) in association with GN bacteremias withEscherichia coliand those withPseudomonas aeruginosa, respectively. Among 12 studies of patients with sepsis, the proportion of endotoxemia positivity (95% confidence interval) among patients withP. aeruginosabacteremia (69% [57 to 79%];P= 0.004) or withProteusbacteremia (76% [51 to 91%];P= 0.04) was significantly higher than that among patients without GN bacteremia (49% [33 to 64%]), but this was not so for patients bacteremic withE. coli(57% [40 to 73%];P= 0.55). Among studies of the sepsis patient group, the concordance of endotoxemia with GN bacteremia was surprisingly weak, especially forE. coliGN bacteremia.

Sessile Serrated Polyp (SSP) Detection Rates in Patients Undergoing Average Risk Screening Colonoscopy: Meta-Analysis of Published Literature

2017 ◽  
Vol 152 (5) ◽  
pp. S337-S338
Author(s):  
Madhav Desai ◽  
Julie Nguyen ◽  
Neil Gupta ◽  
Sravanthi Parasa ◽  
Sreekar Vennelaganti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Screening Colonoscopy ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Serrated Polyp

scholarly journals Systematic review with meta-analysis: age-related malignancy detection rates at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175628482095922
Author(s):  
Judith J. de Jong ◽  
Marten A. Lantinga ◽  
Ina M. E. Thijs ◽  
Philip R. de Reuver ◽  
Joost P. H. Drenth
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Gi Endoscopy ◽  
Upper Gi ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Upper Gi Endoscopy ◽  
Age Limits ◽  
Upper Gi Malignancy ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal

Background: Age is an important and objective risk factor for upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy. The accuracy of various age limits to detect upper GI malignancy is unclear. Determination of this accuracy may aid in the decision to refer symptomatic patients for upper GI endoscopy. The aim of this analysis was to synthesize data on upper GI malignancy detection rates for various age limits worldwide through meta-analysis. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science in November 2018. Selection criteria included studies addressing malignant findings at upper GI endoscopy in a symptomatic population reporting age at time of diagnosis. Meta-analyses were conducted to derive continent-specific cancer detection rates. Results: A total of 33 studies including 346,641 patients across 21 countries fulfilled the inclusion criteria. To detect >80% of malignant cases all symptomatic patients over 40 years of age should be investigated in Africa, over 50 years of age in South America and Asia, and over 55 years of age in North America and Europe. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis provides data on intercontinental variation in age at time of upper GI malignancy diagnosis in symptomatic patients referred for upper GI endoscopy. Guideline recommendations for age-based selection should be tailored to local age-related detection rates.

Do adjuvants add to the efficacy and tolerance of bowel preparations? A meta-analysis of randomized trials

Endoscopy ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (02) ◽  
pp. 159-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Restellini ◽  
Omar Kherad ◽  
Charles Menard ◽  
Myriam Martel ◽  
Alan Barkun
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Adenoma Detection ◽  
Adenoma Detection Rates ◽  
Split Dosing ◽  
Bowel Preparations ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background and study aims Recommendations on adjuvant use with bowel preparations remain disparate. We performed a meta-analysis determining the clinical impact of adding an adjuvant to polyethylene glycol (PEG), sodium phosphate, picosulfate (PICO), or oral sulfate solutions (OSS)-based regimens. Methods Systematic searches were made of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL and ISI Web of knowledge for randomized trials from January 1980 to April 2016 that assessed preparations with or without adjuvants, given in split and non-split dosing, and PEG high- (> 3 L) or low-dose (≤ 2 L) regimens. Bowel cleansing efficacy was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included patient willingness to repeat the procedure, and polyp and adenoma detection rates. Results Of 3093 citations, 77 trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Overall, addition of an adjuvant compared with no adjuvant, irrespective of the type of preparation and mode of administration, yielded improvements in bowel cleanliness (odds ratio [OR] 1.23 [1.01 – 1.51]) without greater willingness to repeat (OR 1.40 [0.91 – 2.15]). Adjuvants combined with high-dose PEG significantly improved colon cleansing (OR 1.96 [1.32 – 2.94]). The odds for achieving adequate preparation with low-dose PEG with an adjuvant were not different to high-dose PEG alone (OR 0.95 [0.73 – 1.22]), but yielded improved tolerance (OR 3.22 [1.85 – 5.55]). However, split high-dose PEG yielded superior cleanliness to low-dose PEG with adjuvants (OR 2.53 [1.25 – 5.13]). No differences were noted for OSS and PICO comparisons, or for any products regarding polyp or adenoma detection rates. Conclusions Critical heterogeneity precludes firm conclusion on the impact of adjuvants with existing bowel preparations. Additional research is required to better characterize the methods of administration and resulting roles of adjuvants in an era of split-dosing.

scholarly journals The Diagnostic Role of 18F-Choline, 18F-Fluciclovine and 18F-PSMA PET/CT in the Detection of Prostate Cancer With Biochemical Recurrence: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rang Wang ◽  
Guohua Shen ◽  
Mingxing Huang ◽  
Rong Tian
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Biochemical Recurrence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Psma Pet ◽  
Pet Ct ◽  
Diagnostic Role ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

BackgroundDiagnosing the biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) is a clinical challenge, and early detection of BCR can help patients receive optimal treatment. We conducted a meta-analysis to define the diagnostic accuracy of PET/CT using 18F-labeled choline, fluciclovine, and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) in patients with BCR.MethodsMultiple databases were searched until March 30, 2021. We included studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-choline, 18F-fluciclovine, and 18F-PSMA PET/CT in patients with BCR. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and detection rate of 18F-labeled tracers were calculated with a random-effects model.ResultsA total of 46 studies met the included criteria; 17, 16, and 13 studies focused on 18F-choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA, respectively. The pooled sensitivities of 18F-choline and 18F-fluciclovine were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85–0.98) and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.65–0.897), and the specificities were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.73–0.97) and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.50–0.79), respectively. The pooled detection rates of 18F-labeled choline, fluciclovine and PSMA were 66, 74, and 83%, respectively. Moreover, the detection rates of 18F-labeled choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA were 35, 23, and 58% for a PSA level less than 0.5 ng/ml; 41, 46, and 75% for a PSA level of 0.5–0.99 ng/ml; 62, 57, and 86% for a PSA level of 1.0–1.99 ng/ml; 80, 92, and 94% for a PSA level more than 2.0 ng/ml.ConclusionThese three 18F-labeled tracers are promising for detecting BCR in prostate cancer patients, with 18F-choline showing superior diagnostic accuracy. In addition, the much higher detection rates of 18F-PSMA showed its superiority over other tracers, particularly in low PSA levels.Systematic Review RegistrationPROSPERO, identifier CRD42020212531.

scholarly journals Performance of ultrasonography screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Yang ◽  
Shengfeng Wang ◽  
Liwen Zhang ◽  
Chao Sheng ◽  
Fengju Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Breast Cancers ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
Biopsy Rate

Abstract Background To investigate the performance of primary ultrasound (US) screening for breast cancer, and that of supplemental US screening for breast cancer after negative mammography (MAM). Methods Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Wed of Science, and Embase) were systematically searched to identify relevant studies published between January 2003 and May 2018. Only high-quality or fair-quality studies reporting any of the following performance values for supplemental or primary US screening were included: sensitivity, specificity, cancer detected rate (CDR), recall rate (RR), biopsy rate (BR), and proportions of invasive cancers (ProIC) or node-negative invasive cancers (ProNNIC) among screening-detected cancers. Results Twenty-three studies were included, including 12 studies in which supplemental US screening was used after negative MAM and 11 joint screening studies in which both MAM and US were used as primary screening methods. Meta-analyses revealed that supplemental US screening could detect 96% [95% confidential intervals (CIs): 82% to 99%] of occult breast cancers missed by MAM and identify 94% (95% CIs: 88% to 97%) of healthy women, with a CDR of 2.9/1000 (95%CIs: 1.8/1000 to 3.9/1000), RR of 8.6% (95%CIs: 4.8% to 13.5%), BR of 3.9% (95%CIs: 2.5% to 5.5%), ProIC of 73.9% (95%CIs: 49.0% to 93.7%), and ProNNIC of 72.6% (95%CIs: 51.9% to 90.0%). Compared with primary MAM screening, primary US screening led to the recall of significantly more women with positive screening results [1.2% (95%CIs:0.4% to 1.9%), P =0.003] and detected significantly more invasive cancers [20.8% (95%CIs: 14.6% to 27.0%), P < 0.001]. However, there were no significant differences for other performance measures between the two screening methods, including sensitivity, specificity, CDR, BR, and ProNNIC. Conclusions Current evidence suggests that supplemental US screening could detect occult breast cancers missed by MAM. Primary US screening has shown to be comparable to primary MAM screening in women with dense breasts in terms of sensitivity, specificity, cancer detection rate, and biopsy rate, but with higher recall rates and higher detection rates for invasive cancers.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Different Respiratory Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abbas Mohammadi ◽  
Elmira Esmaeilzadeh ◽  
Yijia Li ◽  
Ronald J Bosch ◽  
Jonathan Li
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Rna Detection ◽  
Timely Initiation ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
Oropharyngeal Swab

Background: The accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 through respiratory sampling is critical for the prevention of further transmission and the timely initiation of treatment for COVID-19. There is a diverse range of SARS-CoV-2 detection rates in reported studies, with uncertainty as to the optimal sampling strategy for COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing respiratory sampling strategies for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The inclusion criteria were studies that assessed at least two respiratory sampling sites (oropharyngeal swab, nasopharyngeal swab, and sputum) in participants with COVID-19. The percentage positive tests were compared between sampling modalities by constructing a Z-test assuming independence and using the standard errors obtained from the random effects meta-analysis. Findings: From 1039 total studies, we identified 11 studies that met our inclusion criteria, with SARS-CoV-2 testing results from a total of 3442 respiratory tract specimens. Compared to nasopharyngeal swab sampling, sputum testing resulted in significantly higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection while oropharyngeal swab testing had lower rates of viral RNA detection. Earlier sampling after symptom onset was associated with improved detection rates, but the differences in SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection by sampling method was consistent regardless of the duration of symptoms. Interpretation: The results support sputum sampling as a primary method of COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring, and highlight the importance of early testing after symptom onset to increase the rates of COVID-19 diagnosis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document