检索历史 清除

目的 系统评价超声诊断深部浸润型子宫内膜异位症(内异症)文献的质量,并荟萃分析超声检查对深部浸润犁内异症病灶诊断的准确性.方法 采用计算机和手工检索方法,全面收集1966-2009年关于深部浸润型内异症的超声检查诊断性试验的文献,并根据诊断准确性研究的质量评价量表(QUADAS)评价符合纳入标准的文献质量,用Meta-disc软件对直肠超声(TRUS)、阴道超声(TVUS)、直肠内镜超声(EUS)的敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比(+LR)、阴性似然比(-LR)、诊断性试验比值比(DOR)等进行合并分析和异质性检验,对无异质性的文献绘制综合受试者工作特征(SROC)曲线.结果 共纳入符合标准的文献15篇,均为英文文献.QUADAS中有10项条目的 符合率均超过60%;第11项条目"是否是在不知道待评价试验的结果下进行参考标准结果的判读"的符合率为46.7%(7/15);无一篇研究报道了第13项条目"是否报道了无法解释和(或)中间试验的结果".通过阈值效应分析没有发现研究的异质性.TRUS的敏感度、特异度、+LR、-LR、DOR分别为0.925、0.986、30.036、0.107、299.25;TVUS为0.799、0.944、11.972、0.187、69.126;EUS为0.635、0.928、8.022、0.320、39.606;EUS的SROC曲线下面积为0.9479,略高于TVUS的0.9246.结论 TRUS、TVUS和EUS均显示了对深部浸润型内异症较好的诊断价值.本系统评价所纳入15篇文献的偏倚主要来自参考标准判读时未实施盲法,存在变异的可能性较大.

Objective To evaluate the quality of literatures and the accuracy of ultrasonography in diagnosis of deeply infiltrating endometriosis(DIE).Methods The database of Medline (1966 to 2009), the excerpta medica database (EMBASE, 1980 to 2009), Chinese biological medicine on disc (CBMdisc, 1978 to 2009), China national knowledge infrastructure (CNKI, 1979 to 2009) and VIP for Chinese technology periodical database (VIP, 1989 to 2009) Cochrane library of studies about the diagnosis of ultrasound for DIE were searched and analyzed.Quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS) items were used to evaluate the quality of literatures.The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio(+ LR), negative likelihood ratio (-LR) ,diagnostic test odds ratio (DOR) for the pooled analysis and heterogeneity test were analyzed for transvaginal ultrasonography(TVUS), transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) and rectal endoscopic sonography(EUS) by Meta-disc software, and drew the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves for those without heterogeneity.Results Totally 15 literatures in English were enrolled into this study.The positive rate of 10 items of QUADAS were above 60%, whereas that of the 11th item "Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index test" was 46.7% ;none of studies had mentioned the 13th item " Were uninterpretable/intermediate test results reported".All researches had no heterogeneity by explored threshold effect.The results of pooled sensitivity, specificity, + LR, - LR, DOR were 0.925,0.986, 30.036,0.107, 299.25 for TRUS, 0.799,0.944,11.972,0.187, 69.126 for transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS), and 0.635,0.928,8.022, O.320, 39.606 for EUS, respectively.Area under the curve of EUS was 0.9479, and that of TVUS was 0.9246.Conclusions TRUS,TVUS and EUS all showed optimal value in diagnosis of DIE.The bias identified from the 15 studies might be mainly resulted from reference standard review bias.