RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of Necrotizing Otitis Externa (NOE) based on radiologic studies. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar databases were searched. True-positive and false-negative results were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. RESULTS: The included studies contained data on 37 studies diagnosed with NOE. The sensitivity of gallium-67, technetium-99m, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was 0.9378 (0.7688-0.9856), 0.9699 (0.8839-0.9927), and 0.9417 (0.6968-0.9913), respectively. For Computed Tomography (CT), the positive criteria consisted of bony erosion alone and bony erosion plus any soft tissue abnormality. The sensitivity of CT based only on bony erosion was 0.7062 (0.5954-0.7971); it was higher 0.9572 (0.9000-0.9823) when based on bony erosion plus any soft tissue abnormality. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic sensitivity of technetium-99m, gallium-67, and MRI was favorable. On CT, the presence of bony erosion may be a useful diagnostic marker of NOE, but the diagnostic sensitivity will be even higher if the criterion of any soft tissue abnormality is also included; however, care should be taken when interpreting the results. Our study demonstrates the potential utility of radiology studies for diagnosing NOE, but their lack of specificity must be considered, and standardized anatomic criteria are still needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2A.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Abstract Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of Necrotizing Otitis Externa (NOE) based on radiologic studies. Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar databases were searched. True-positive and false-negative results were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Results: The included studies contained data on 37 studies diagnosed with NOE. The sensitivity of gallium-67, technetium-99m, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was 0.9378 (0.7688-0.9856), 0.9699 (0.8839-0.9927), and 0.9417 (0.6968-0.9913), respectively. For Computed Tomography (CT), the positive criteria consisted of bony erosion alone and bony erosion plus any soft tissue abnormality. The sensitivity of CT based only on bony erosion was 0.7062 (0.5954-0.7971); it was higher 0.9572 (0.9000-0.9823) when based on bony erosion plus any soft tissue abnormality. Conclusion: The diagnostic sensitivity of technetium-99m, gallium-67, and MRI was favorable. On CT, the presence of bony erosion may be a useful diagnostic marker of NOE, but the diagnostic sensitivity will be even higher if the criterion of any soft tissue abnormality is also included; however, care should be taken when interpreting the results. Our study demonstrates the potential utility of radiology studies for diagnosing NOE, but their lack of specificity must be considered, and standardized anatomic criteria are still needed. Level of evidence: 2A.

RESUMEN

Abstract Introduction: Traditional meta-analyses on the diagnostic accuracy of oral lesions have been conducted, but they were inherently limited to direct pairwise comparisons between a single method and a single alternative, while multiple diagnostic options and the ranking thereof were methodologically not possible. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic values of various methods in patients with oral potential malignant disease by performing a network meta-analysis. Methods: Two authors independently searched the databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Google scholar) up to June 2020 for studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of various tools (autofluorescence, chemiluminescence, cytology, narrow band imaging, and toluidine blue) with visual examination or other tools. The outcomes of interest for this analysis were sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value and accuracy. Both a standard pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted. Results: Treatment networks consisting of six interventions were defined for the network metaanalysis. The results of traditional meta-analysis showed that, among six methods, narrow band imaging showed higher sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and accuracy compared to visual examination. The results of network meta-analysis showed that autofluorescence, chemiluminescence, and narrow band imaging had higher sensitivity compared with visual examination, and that chemiluminescence and narrow band imaging had higher negative predictive value compared with visual examination. However, autofluorescence and chemiluminescence had lower specificity compared with visual examination. There were no significant differences in positive predictive value and accuracy among the six interventions. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that narrow banding imaging has superiority in terms of sensitivity and negative predictive value compared with the other five tested agents.

Resumo Introdução: Metanálises tradicionais sobre a precisão diagnóstica de lesões orais têm sido conduzidas, mas são inerentemente limitadas a comparações pareadas diretas entre um único método e uma única opção, enquanto múltiplas opções de diagnóstico e suas classificações ainda não foram metodologicamente possíveis. Objetivo: Avaliar os valores diagnósticos de vários métodos em pacientes com doença oral potencialmente maligna e fazer uma metanálise de rede. Método: Dois autores pesquisaram independentemente os bancos de dados (Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials e Google Scholar) até junho de 2020 para estudos que comparassem a precisão diagnóstica de várias ferramentas (autofluorescência, quimioluminescência, citologia, imagem de banda estreita e cloreto de tolônio) com exame visual ou outras ferramentas. Os resultados de interesse para esta análise foram sensibilidade, especificidade, valor preditivo negativo, valor preditivo e precisão. Tanto uma metanálise pareada padrão quanto uma metanálise de rede foram conduzidas. Resultados: Redes de tratamento compostas por seis intervenções foram definidas para a metanálise de rede. Os resultados da metanálise tradicional mostraram que, entre seis métodos, a imagem de banda estreita apresentou maior sensibilidade, especificidade, valor preditivo negativo, valor preditivo e precisão em comparação ao exame visual. Os resultados da metanálise de rede mostraram que a autofluorescência, a quimioluminescência e a imagem de banda estreita obtiveram maior sensibilidade em comparação com o exame visual e que a quimioluminescência e a imagem de banda estreita apresentaram maior valor preditivo negativo em comparação com o exame visual. Entretanto, a autofluorescência e a quimioluminescência mostraram especificidade inferior em comparação com o exame visual. Não houve diferenças significativas no valor preditivo e na precisão entre as seis intervenções. Conclusão: Este estudo demonstrou que a imagem de banda estreita demonstra superioridade em termos de sensibilidade e valor preditivo negativo em comparação com os outros cinco agentes testados.

RESUMEN

Abstract Introduction Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). Results Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2 = 9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). Conclusion Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone.

Resumo Introdução A detecção precoce de distúrbios orais potencialmente malignos é fundamental para um bom prognóstico e não está claro se o uso da quimioluminescência como método auxiliar de triagem diagnóstica melhora a eficácia do diagnóstico. Objetivo Avaliar a precisão da quimioluminescência para o diagnóstico de câncer oral e pré-câncer. Método Foram revisados 16 estudos prospectivos e retrospectivos dos bancos de dados PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase e Google Scholar. Os distúrbios da mucosa oral detectados por quimioluminescência foram comparados com os distúrbios da mucosa oral detectados pelo azul de toluidina ou pelo exame visual. Taxas de resultados verdadeiro-positivos, verdadeiro-negativos, falso-positivos e falso-negativos foram extraídas de cada estudo. A qualidade metodológica foi avaliada com a ferramenta Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-versão 2 (QUADAS-2). Resultados Sensibilidade, especificidade, valor preditivo negativo e odds ratio diagnóstico do uso do azul de toluidina foram 0,832 (intervalo de confiança de 95%: 0,692-0,917), 0,429 (IC95%: 0,217-0,672), 0,747 (IC95%: 0,607-0,849) e 4,061 (intervalo de confiança 95%: 1,528-10,796; I2 = 9,128%), respectivamente. A área sob a curva SROC, do inglês summary receiver operating characteristic, foi de 0,743. Comparada ao azul de toluidina, como usado em 12 estudos, a quimioluminescência apresentou uma sensibilidade mais alta (0,831 vs. 0,694) e especificidade (0,415 vs. 0,734), valor preditivo negativo (0,674 vs. 0,729) e odds ratio diagnóstico (3,889 vs. 7,705) mais baixos. Comparado com o exame clínico, como usado em três estudos, a quimioluminescência apresentou menor odds ratio diagnóstico (4.576 vs. 5.499) e área sob a curva (0,818 vs. 0,91). Conclusão Embora a quimioluminescência em si tenha boa sensibilidade para o diagnóstico de câncer oral e pré-câncer, sua precisão diagnóstica é comparável ou pior do que o azul de toluidina e o exame clínico. A precisão do diagnóstico foi, portanto, insuficiente para o uso isolado confiável da quimioluminescência.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Early detection of potentially malignant oral cavity disorders is critical for a good prognosis, and it is unclear whether the use of chemiluminescence as an adjunctive diagnostic screening method improves diagnostic accuracy. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescence for diagnosis of oral cancer and precancerous lesions. METHODS: Sixteen prospective and retrospective studies from PubMed, Cochrane database, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were reviewed. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by chemiluminescence, was compared with oral mucosal disorder detected by toluidine blue or visual examination. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative rates were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the use of toluidine blue were 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.692-0.917), 0.429 (95% CI 0.217-0.672), 0.747 (95% CI 0.607-0.849), and 4.061 (95% CI 1.528-10.796; I2=9.128%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.743. Compared with toluidine blue, as used in 12 studies, chemiluminescence had a higher sensitivity (0.831 vs. 0.694); it had a lower specificity (0.415 vs. 0.734), negative predictive value (0.674 vs. 0.729), and DOR (3.891 vs. 7.705). Compared with clinical examination, as used in three studies, chemiluminescence had lower DOR (4.576 vs. 5.499) and area under the curve (0.818 vs. 0.91). CONCLUSION: Although chemiluminescence itself has good sensitivity for diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and precancer, the diagnostic accuracy of chemiluminescence is comparable to or worse than toluidine blue and clinical examination. Diagnostic accuracy was therefore insufficient for reliable use of chemiluminescence alone.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Traditional meta-analyses on the diagnostic accuracy of oral lesions have been conducted, but they were inherently limited to direct pairwise comparisons between a single method and a single alternative, while multiple diagnostic options and the ranking thereof were methodologically not possible. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic values of various methods in patients with oral potential malignant disease by performing a network meta-analysis. METHODS: Two authors independently searched the databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Google scholar) up to June 2020 for studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of various tools (autofluorescence, chemiluminescence, cytology, narrow band imaging, and toluidine blue) with visual examination or other tools. The outcomes of interest for this analysis were sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value and accuracy. Both a standard pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted. RESULTS: Treatment networks consisting of six interventions were defined for the network meta-analysis. The results of traditional meta-analysis showed that, among six methods, narrow band imaging showed higher sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and accuracy compared to visual examination. The results of network meta-analysis showed that autofluorescence, chemiluminescence, and narrow band imaging had higher sensitivity compared with visual examination, and that chemiluminescence and narrow band imaging had higher negative predictive value compared with visual examination. However, autofluorescence and chemiluminescence had lower specificity compared with visual examination. There were no significant differences in positive predictive value and accuracy among the six interventions. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that narrow banding imaging has superiority in terms of sensitivity and negative predictive value compared with the other five tested agents.

Asunto(s)