OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with brush cytology is an important tool in the diagnosis of hepatobiliary malignancies. However, reported sensitivity of brush cytology is suboptimal and differs markedly per study. The aim of this study is to analyze the optimal technique of endobiliary brushing during ERCP.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis according was performed using Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane library, and reported reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. The intervention reported should involve ERCP, performed by the endoscopist with a comparison of different brushing techniques. The primary outcome was sensitivity for malignancy. Studies published up to December 2022 were included. Percutaneous techniques and cytological or laboratory techniques for processing of material were excluded. Bias was assessed using the Quadas-2 tool. Pooled sensitivity rates and Forest plots were analyzed for the primary outcome.
RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included. Three studies reported on brushing before or after dilation of a biliary stricture. No improvement in sensitivity was found. Five studies reported on alternative brush designs. This did not lead to improved sensitivity. Seven studies reported on the aspiration and analysis of bile fluid, which resulted in a 16% increase in sensitivity (95% CI 4-29%). One study reported an increased in the number of brush passes to the stricture, providing an increase in sensitivity of 20%. Substantial heterogeneity between studies was found, both methodological and statistical.
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the number of brush-passes and sending bile fluid for cytology increases the sensitivity of biliary brushings during ERCP. Dilation before brushing or alternative brush designs did not increase sensitivity.

UNASSIGNED: Researchers have delved into noninvasive diagnostic methods of renal fibrosis (RF) in chronic kidney disease, including ultrasound (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and radiomics. However, the value of these diagnostic methods in the noninvasive diagnosis of RF remains contentious. Consequently, the present study aimed to systematically delineate the accuracy of the noninvasive diagnosis of RF.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic search covering PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for all data available up to 28 July 2023 was conducted for eligible studies.
UNASSIGNED: We included 21 studies covering 4885 participants. Among them, nine studies utilized US as a noninvasive diagnostic method, eight studies used MRI, and four articles employed radiomics. The sensitivity and specificity of US for detecting RF were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86) and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.72-0.84). The sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70-0.83) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.96). The sensitivity and specificity of radiomics were 0.69 (95% CI: 0.59-0.77) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.68-0.85).
UNASSIGNED: The current early noninvasive diagnostic methods for RF include US, MRI, and radiomics. However, this study demonstrates that US has a higher sensitivity for the detection of RF compared to MRI. Compared to US, radiomics studies based on US did not show superior advantages. Therefore, challenges still exist in the current radiomics approaches for diagnosing RF, and further exploration of optimized artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms and technologies is needed.

BACKGROUND: The steep rise in substance use and substance use disorder (SUD) shows an urgency to assess its prevalence using valid measures. This systematic review summarizes the validity of measures to assess the prevalence of substance use and SUD in the US estimated in population and sub-population-based surveys.
METHODS: A literature search was performed using nine online databases. Studies were included in the review if they were published in English and tested the validity of substance use and SUD measures among US adults at the general or sub-population level. Independent reviews were conducted by the authors to complete data synthesis and assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS: Overall, 46 studies validating substance use/SUD (n = 46) measures were included in this review, in which 63% were conducted in clinical settings and 89% assessed the validity of SUD measures. Among the studies that assessed SUD screening measures, 78% examined a generic SUD measure, and the rest screened for specific disorders. Almost every study used a different survey measure. Overall, sensitivity and specificity tests were conducted in over a third of the studies for validation, and 10 studies used receiver operating characteristics curve.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a lack of standardized methods in surveys measuring and reporting prevalence of substance use/SUD among US adults. It highlights a critical need to develop short measures for assessing SUD that do not require lengthy, time-consuming data collection that would be difficult to incorporate into population-based surveys assessing a multitude of health dimensions.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42022298280.

The loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) technique is a great alternative to PCR-based methods, as it is fast, easy to use and works with high sensitivity and specificity without the need for expensive instruments. However, one of the limitations of LAMP is difficulty in achieving the simultaneous detection of several targets in a single tube, as the methodologies that allow this rely on fluorogenic probes containing specific target sequences, complicating their adaptation and the optimization of assays. Here, we summarize different methods for the development of multiplex LAMP assays based on sequence-specific detection, illustrated with a schematic representation of the technique, and evaluate their practical application based on the real-time detection and quantification of results, the possibility to visualize the results at a glance, the prior stabilization of reaction components, promoting the point-of-care use, the maximum number of specific targets amplified, and the validation of the technique in clinical samples. The various LAMP multiplexing methodologies differ in their operating conditions and mechanism. Each methodology has its advantages and disadvantages, and the choice among them will depend on specific application interests.

BACKGROUND: Despite the existence of numerous studies investigating the diagnostic potential of blood microRNAs for colorectal cancer, the microRNAs under consideration vary widely, and comparative analysis of their diagnostic value is lacking. Consequently, this systematic review aims to identify the most effective microRNA blood tumor markers to enhance clinical decision-making in colorectal cancer screening.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane, was conducted to identify case‒control or cohort studies that examined the diagnostic value of peripheral blood microRNAs in colorectal cancer. Studies were included if they provided sensitivity and specificity data, were published in English and were available between January 1, 2000, and February 10, 2023. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist was employed for quality assessment. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to estimate combined risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with results presented via rankograms. This study is registered with the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY), 202,380,092.
RESULTS: From an initial pool of 2254 records, 79 met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 90 microRNAs. The seven most frequently studied microRNAs (43 records) were selected for inclusion, all of which demonstrated moderate to high quality. miR-23, miR-92, and miR-21 exhibited the highest sensitivity and accuracy, outperforming traditional tumor markers CA19-9 and CEA in terms of RR values and 95% CI for both sensitivity and accuracy. With the exception of miR-17, no significant difference was observed between each microRNA and CA19-9 and CEA in terms of specificity.
CONCLUSIONS: Among the most extensively researched blood microRNAs, miR-23, miR-92, and miR-21 demonstrated superior diagnostic value for colorectal cancer due to their exceptional sensitivity and accuracy. This systematic review and network meta-analysis may serve as a valuable reference for the clinical selection of microRNAs as tumor biomarkers.

BACKGROUND: Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the main technique used to identify COVID-19 from respiratory samples. It has been suggested in several articles that chest CTs could offer a possible alternate diagnostic tool for COVID-19; however, no professional medical body recommends using chest CTs as an early COVID-19 detection modality. This literature review examines the use of CT scans as a diagnostic tool for COVID-19.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of research works published in peer-reviewed journals was carried out utilizing precisely stated criteria. The search was limited to English-language publications, and studies of COVID-19-positive patients diagnosed using both chest CT scans and RT-PCR tests were sought. For this review, four databases were consulted: these were the Cochrane and ScienceDirect catalogs, and the CINAHL and Medline databases made available by EBSCOhost.
RESULTS: In total, 285 possibly pertinent studies were found during an initial search. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, six studies remained for analysis. According to the included studies, chest CT scans were shown to have a 44 to 98% sensitivity and 25 to 96% specificity in terms of COVID-19 diagnosis. However, methodological limitations were identified in all studies included in this review.
CONCLUSIONS: RT-PCR is still the suggested first-line diagnostic technique for COVID-19; while chest CT is adequate for use in symptomatic patients, it is not a sufficiently robust diagnostic tool for the primary screening of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is a ubiquitous health condition with severe outcomes. The advancement of ultrasonography techniques allows its application in evaluating pulmonary diseases, providing safer and accessible bedside therapeutic decisions compared to chest X-ray and chest computed tomography (CT) scan. Because of its aforementioned benefits, we aimed to confirm the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound (LUS) for pneumonia in adults.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed of Medline, Cochrane and Crossref, independently by two authors. The selection of studies proceeded based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria without restrictions to particular study designs, language or publication dates and was followed by data extraction. The gold standard reference in the included studies was chest X-ray/CT scan or both.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine (29) studies containing 6702 participants were included in our meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity, specificity and PPV were 92% (95% CI: 91-93%), 94% (95% CI: 94 to 95%) and 93% (95% CI: 89 to 96%), respectively. Pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were 16 (95% CI: 14 to 19) and 0.08 (95% CI: 0.07 to 0.09). The area under the ROC curve of LUS was 0. 9712.
CONCLUSIONS: LUS has high diagnostic accuracy in adult pneumonia. Its contribution could form an optimistic clue in future updates considering this condition.

Accurate tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis remains challenging, especially in resource-limited settings. This study aims to assess the diagnostic performance of the QIAreach QuantiFERON-TB (QFT) assay, with a specific focus on comparing its diagnostic performance with the QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus). We systematically reviewed relevant individual studies on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to January 20, 2024. The focus was on evaluating the diagnostic parameters of the QIAreach QFT assay for TB infection, which included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and concordance with the QFT-Plus assay. QIAreach QFT demonstrated strong diagnostic performance with a pooled sensitivity of 99% (95% CI 95-100%) and specificity of 94% (95% CI 85-97%). Additionally, it showed a PLR of 15.6 (95% CI 6.5-37.5) and NLR of 0.01 (95% CI 0-0.03). The pooled PPV and NPV were 88% (95% CI 70-98%) and 100% (95% CI 99-100%), respectively. Concordance analysis with QFT-Plus revealed a pooled positive percent agreement of 98% (95% CI 88-100%) and pooled negative percent agreement of 91% (95% CI 81-97%), with a pooled overall percent agreement of 92% (95% CI 83-98). In conclusion, QIAreach QFT has shown promising diagnostic performance, with a strong concordance with QFT-Plus. However, further studies are needed to comprehensively evaluate its diagnostic performance in the context of TB infection.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis remains a leading cause of death worldwide. In this context, heparin-binding protein (HBP) has emerged as a possible biomarker, drawing significant attention for its diagnostic and prognostic usefulness in septic patients. Despite this advancement, the literature yields conflicting results. This study is intended to critically evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of HBP in critically ill septic patients.
METHODS: We searched multiple databases, including PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and EBSCO, to identify relevant studies on April 27, 2023. We included studies investigating sepsis or its severe outcomes that reported HBP levels and the required data to create 2 × 2 tables. We used R version 4.2.2 and R Studio to analyze the pooled diagnostic accuracy outcomes. The diagmeta package was utilized to calculate the optimum cutoff value.
RESULTS: In our meta-analysis, we incorporated 28 studies including 5508 patients. The analysis revealed that HBP has a sensitivity of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60; 0.79) and a specificity of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.51; 0.81) in diagnosing sepsis, respectively. HBP demonstrated moderate prognostic accuracy for mortality at a cutoff value of 161.415 ng/mL, with a sensitivity and specificity of 72%, and for severe sepsis outcomes at a cutoff value of 58.907 ng/mL, with a sensitivity and specificity of 71%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate a relatively moderate diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of HBP for sepsis. Future studies are required to verify the accuracy of HBP as a biomarker for sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the aortic dissection detection risk score (ADD-RS) used alone or in combination with D-dimer for detecting acute aortic syndrome (AAS) in patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of AAS.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 2024. Additionally, the reference lists of included studies and other systematic reviews were thoroughly searched. All diagnostic accuracy studies that assessed the use of ADD-RS alone or with D-Dimer for diagnosing AAS compared with a reference standard test (e.g. computer tomographic angiography (CTA), ECG-gated CTA, echocardiography, magnetic resonance angiography, operation, or autopsy) were included. Two reviewers independently selected and extracted data. Risk of bias was appraised using QUADAS-2 tool. Data were synthesised using hierarchical meta-analysis models.
RESULTS: We selected 13 studies from the 2017 citations identified, including six studies evaluating combinations of ADD-RS alongside D-dimer>500ng/L. Summary sensitivities and specificities (95% credible interval) were: ADD-RS>0 94.6% (90%, 97.5%) and 34.7% (20.7%, 51.2%), ADD-RS>1 43.4% (31.2%, 57.1%) and 89.3% (80.4%, 94.8%); ADD RS>0 or D-Dimer>500ng/L 99.8% (98.7%, 100%) and 21.8% (12.1%, 32.6%); ADD RS>1 or D-Dimer>500ng/L 98.3% (94.9%, 99.5%) and 51.4% (38.7%, 64.1%); ADD RS>1 or ADD RS = 1 with D-dimer>500ng/L 93.1% (87.1%, 96.3%) and 67.1% (54.4%, 77.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Combinations of ADD-RS and D-dimer can be used to select patients with suspected AAS for imaging with a range of trade-offs between sensitivity (93.1% to 99.8%) and specificity (21.8% to 67.1%).