Article ; Online: Diagnostic accuracy of water-soluble contrast enema, contrast-enema computed tomography and endoscopy in detecting anastomotic leakage after (Colo) proctectomy: A meta-analysis.
2023 Volume 25, Issue 7, Page(s) 1371–1380
Abstract: Background: Anastomotic leakage (AL) as a result of creation of a colorectal/anal anastomosis still represents a frequent complication of colorectal surgery, with short- and long-term consequences on postoperative morbidity, quality of life and ... ...
| Abstract | Background: Anastomotic leakage (AL) as a result of creation of a colorectal/anal anastomosis still represents a frequent complication of colorectal surgery, with short- and long-term consequences on postoperative morbidity, quality of life and oncological outcomes. However, early diagnosis of AL may result in improved outcomes. The aims of this study were to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE), contrast enema computed tomography (CECT) and endoscopy in identifying AL and to identify the diagnostic procedure that is most accurate. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 studies accounting for a total of 25 tests reporting diagnostic accuracy estimates was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines up to June 2021. For the diagnostic tests we evaluated the pooled estimates and conducted pairwise comparisons. Results: For WSCE, the pooled sensitivity was 0.50, the pooled specificity was 0.99 and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.91. For endoscopy, the pooled sensitivity was 0.69, specificity was 1.00 and AUC was 0.99. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for CECT were 0.89 and 1.00, respectively; the AUC was 0.99. The comparison between CECT and WSCE highlighted a significantly greater sensitivity (p = 0.04) for CECT, whereas no difference was found for specificity. Compared with CECT, endoscopy was not significantly more accurate in terms of either sensitivity or specificity. Endoscopy was found to be significantly more specific than WSCE (p = 0.031) but no difference was found for sensitivity. Conclusion: Water-soluble contrast enema, endoscopy and CECT have an elevated diagnostic accuracy. However, WSCE is less accurate than either endoscopy or CECT. Although greater sensitivity was demonstrated for CECT compared with endoscopy, this was not significant. |
|---|---|
| MeSH term(s) | Humans ; Anastomotic Leak/diagnostic imaging ; Anastomotic Leak/etiology ; Contrast Media ; Quality of Life ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Proctectomy ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal ; Enema/methods ; Water |
| Chemical Substances | Contrast Media ; Water (059QF0KO0R) |
| Language | English |
| Publishing date | 2023-06-01 |
| Publishing country | England |
| Document type | Meta-Analysis ; Systematic Review ; Journal Article ; Review |
| ZDB-ID | 1440017-0 |
| ISSN | 1463-1318 ; 1462-8910 |
| ISSN (online) | 1463-1318 |
| ISSN | 1462-8910 |
| DOI | 10.1111/codi.16591 |
| Database | MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE |
More links
Kategorien
In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter
| Zs.A 5799: Show issues | Location: Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand) bis Jg. 1994: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular Jg. 1995 - 2021: Lesesall (2.OG) ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG) |
Order via subito
This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.