scholarly journals Elastography for the differential diagnosis of malignant versus benign testicular lesions: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ziwei Lin ◽  
Rui Lin ◽  
Huaiyu Wu ◽  
Linghu Wu ◽  
Jieying Zeng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Testicular Lesions

scholarly journals PAX2 in endometrial carcinogenesis and in differential diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy

2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (3) ◽  
pp. 287-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Raffone ◽  
Antonio Travaglino ◽  
Gabriele Saccone ◽  
Massimo Mascolo ◽  
Luigi Insabato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Endometrial Hyperplasia ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Can physical testing be used to distinguish between migraine and cervicogenic headache sufferers? A protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e031587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernesto Anarte ◽  
Gabriela Ferreira Carvalho ◽  
Annika Schwarz ◽  
Kerstin Luedtke ◽  
Deborah Falla
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cervicogenic Headache ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Black Scale ◽  
Physical Tests ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Asymptomatic Subjects

IntroductionDifferential diagnosis of migraine and cervicogenic headache (CGH) can be challenging given the large overlap of symptoms, commonly leading to misdiagnosis and ineffective treatment. In order to strengthen the differential diagnosis of headache, previous studies have evaluated the utility of physical tests to examine for musculoskeletal impairment, mainly in the cervical spine, which could be provoking or triggering headache. However, no systematic review has attempted to evaluate whether physical tests can differentiate CGH from migraine or both conditions from asymptomatic subjects.Methods/analysisA systematic review protocol has been designed and is reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). A sensitive topic-based search strategy is planned which will include databases, hand searching of key journals and consultation of relevant leading authors in this field. Terms and keywords will be selected after discussion and agreement. Two independent reviewers will perform the search and select studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, including any cohort or observational studies evaluating the topic of this review; a third reviewer will confirm accuracy. A narrative synthesis will be developed for all included studies and, if possible, a meta-analysis will be conducted. The overall quality of the evidence will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist for diagnostic accuracy studies and the Downs and Black scale for those studies where the QUADAS-2 checklist cannot be applied.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required since no patient information will be collected. The results will provide a deeper understanding about the possibility of using physical tests to differentiate cervicogenic headache from migraine and from asymptomatic subjects, which has direct relevance for clinicians managing people with headache. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019135269.

The Performance of CT versus MRI in the Differential Diagnosis of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis

2018 ◽  
Vol 118 (06) ◽  
pp. 1067-1077 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weilin Xu ◽  
Liansheng Gao ◽  
Tao Li ◽  
Neha Ramdoyal ◽  
Jianmin Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Cerebral Venous Thrombosis ◽  
Sinus Thrombosis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic ◽  
Ct And Mri

Background Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is a rare disease, and with poor prognosis. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the most commonly used image modalities for patients with non-specific neurologic symptoms. We present here a meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of CT and MRI in the differential diagnosis of CVT and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST). Materials and Methods A comprehensive search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Database and Chinese Biomedical (CBM) databases was conducted prior to March 20, 2017. In this report, we assess the methodological quality of each article individually and perform a meta-analysis to obtain the summary of the diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in correctly identifying CVT and CVST. Results Twenty-four eligible articles comprising 48 studies (4,595 cases) were included. The pooled sensitivity for CT–CVT/CT–CVST groups is 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76, 0.82)/0.81(95% CI: 0.78, 0.84), and pooled specificity is 0.90 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.91)/0.89 (0.88, 0.91), with an area under the curve (AUC) for the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) of 0.9314/0.9161, respectively. No significant heterogeneity and publication bias was observed across each study. For MRI–CVT/MRI–CVST, the pooled sensitivity is 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.85)/0.80 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.83), and pooled specificity is 0.92 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.94)/0.91(0.89, 0.92), with an AUC for the SROC of 0.9221/0.9273, respectively. Conclusion This meta-analysis indicates that both CT and MRI have a high level of diagnostic accuracy in the differential diagnosis of CVT and CVST, independent of stage, target for analysis or analysis methods. They could be chosen as alternative sub-optimal gold standards for diagnosing CVT and CVST, especially in emergency.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document