Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31980881›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2020

Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) to differentiate uric acid from non-uric acid calculi: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Trevor A McGrath, Robert A Frank, Nicola Schieda, Brian Blew, Jean-Paul Salameh, Patrick M M Bossuyt, Matthew D F McInnes

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Urate Crystals; Beyond Joints.Frontiers in medicine · 2021
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Trevor A McGrathDepartment of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Robert A FrankDepartment of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Nicola SchiedaDepartment of Radiology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Room c159 Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus, 1053 Carling Ave., Ottawa, ON, K1Y 4E9, Canada.
Brian BlewDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Jean-Paul SalamehJean-Paul Salameh BSc, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Patrick M M BossuytDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Matthew D F McInnesDepartment of Radiology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Room c159 Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus, 1053 Carling Ave., Ottawa, ON, K1Y 4E9, Canada. mmcinnes@toh.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8404-4075
University of Ottawa · CAAmsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUric acid stone diagnosis is presently done primarily with in vitro analysis of stones. In vivo diagnosis with dual-energy CT (DECT) would allow earlier initiation of therapy with urine alkalinization and avoid surgical intervention.

objectiveTo evaluate if DECT, using stone analysis as reference standard, is sufficiently accurate to replace stone analysis for diagnosis of uric acid stones.

methodsOriginal studies in patients with urolithiasis examined with DECT with stone analysis as the reference standard were eligible for inclusion. MEDLINE (1946-2018), Embase (1947-2018), CENTRAL (August 2018), and multiple urology and radiology conferences were searched. QUADAS-2 was used to assess risk of bias and applicability. Meta-analyses were performed using a bivariate random-effects model.

resultsA total of 21 studies (1105 patients, 1442 stones) were included. Fourteen studies containing 662 patients (944 stones) were analyzed in the uric acid dominant target condition (majority of stone composition uric acid): mean sensitivity was 0.88 (95% CI 0.79-0.93) and specificity 0.98 (95% CI 0.96-0.99). Thirteen studies (674 patients, 760 stones) were analyzed in the uric acid-containing target condition (< majority of stone composition uric acid): mean sensitivity was 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.89) and specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.94-0.98). Meta-regression showed no significant variability in test accuracy. Two studies had one or more domains at high risk of bias and there were no concerns regarding applicability.

conclusionDECT is an accurate replacement test for diagnosis of uric acid calculi in vivo, such that stone analysis could be replaced in the diagnostic pathway. This would enable earlier initiation of urine alkalinization. KEY POINTS: • DECT for uric acid dominant stones has sensitivity of 0.88 (95% CI 0.79-0.93) and specificity of 0.98 (95% CI 0.96-0.99); uric acid-containing stones had mean sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.89) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI 0.94-0.98). • Meta-regression did not identify any variables (study design, reference standard, dual-energy CT type, dose, risk of bias) that influenced test accuracy. • Only 2 of the 21 included studies had 1 or more domain considered to be at high risk of bias with the majority of domains considered at low risk of bias; there were no concerns regarding applicability in any of the included studies.

Indexed as

Diagnosis, DifferentialHumansRadiography, Dual-Energy Scanned ProjectionReproducibility of ResultsTomography, X-Ray ComputedUric AcidUrinary CalculiUric AcidTomography, X-ray computedUric acidUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID31980881
OpenAlexW3002605766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.