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.

The versatile basic structure of piperazine allows for the development and production of newer bioactive molecules that can be used to treat a wide range of diseases. Piperazine derivatives are unique and can easily be modified for the desired pharmacological activity. The two opposing nitrogen atoms in a six-membered piperazine ring offer a large polar surface area, relative structural rigidity, and more acceptors and donors of hydrogen bonds. These properties frequently result in greater water solubility, oral bioavailability, and ADME characteristics, as well as improved target affinity and specificity. Various synthetic protocols have been reported for piperazine and its derivatives. In this review, we focused on recently published synthetic protocols for the synthesis of the piperazine and its derivatives. The structure-activity relationship concerning different biological activities of various piperazine-containing drugs has also been highlighted to provide a good understanding to researchers for future research on piperazines.

Basophil activation test (BAT) or the mast cell activation test (MAT) are two in vitro tests that are currently being studied in food allergy as diagnostic tools as an alternative to oral food challenges (OFCs). We conducted a meta-analysis on BAT and MAT, assessing their specificity and sensitivity in diagnosing peanut allergy. Six databases were searched for studies on patients suspected of having peanut allergy. Studies using BAT or MAT to peanut extract and/or component as diagnostic tools with results given in percentage of CD63 activation were included in this meta-analysis. Study quality was evaluated with the QUADAS-2 tool. On the 11 studies identified, eight focused exclusively on children, while three included a mixed population of adults and children. Only one study provided data on MAT, precluding us from conducting a statistical analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of BAT was higher when stimulated with peanut extract rather than Ara h 2 with a pooled specificity of 96% (95% CI: 0.89-0.98) and sensitivity of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.74-0.93). The sensitivity and specificity of BATs in discriminating between allergic and sensitized patients were studied as well, with pooled analysis revealing a sensitivity of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.74; 0.93) and a specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.94, 0.98). BATs, when stimulated with peanut extracts, exhibit a satisfactory sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of peanut allergy and can help to discriminate between allergic individuals and those only sensitized to peanuts. More investigations on the potential for MATs diagnostic methods are warranted.

BACKGROUND: Burkholderia pseudomallei, a Gram-negative pathogen, causes melioidosis. Although various clinical laboratory identification methods exist, culture-based techniques lack comprehensive evaluation. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of culture-based automation and non-automation methods.
METHODS: Data were collected via PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus using specific search strategies. Selected studies underwent bias assessment using QUADAS-2. Sensitivity and specificity were computed, generating pooled estimates. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics.
RESULTS: The review encompassed 20 studies with 2988 B. pseudomallei samples and 753 non-B. pseudomallei samples. Automation-based methods, particularly with updating databases, exhibited high pooled sensitivity (82.79%; 95% CI 64.44-95.85%) and specificity (99.94%; 95% CI 98.93-100.00%). Subgroup analysis highlighted superior sensitivity for updating-database automation (96.42%, 95% CI 90.01-99.87%) compared to non-updating (3.31%, 95% CI 0.00-10.28%), while specificity remained high at 99.94% (95% CI 98.93-100%). Non-automation methods displayed varying sensitivity and specificity. In-house latex agglutination demonstrated the highest sensitivity (100%; 95% CI 98.49-100%), followed by commercial latex agglutination (99.24%; 95% CI 96.64-100%). However, API 20E had the lowest sensitivity (19.42%; 95% CI 12.94-28.10%). Overall, non-automation tools showed sensitivity of 88.34% (95% CI 77.30-96.25%) and specificity of 90.76% (95% CI 78.45-98.57%).
CONCLUSIONS: The study underscores automation\'s crucial role in accurately identifying B. pseudomallei, supporting evidence-based melioidosis management decisions. Automation technologies, especially those with updating databases, provide reliable and efficient identification.

BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a clinical and laboratory diagnosis. Populations at higher risk of developing disease require a high clinical index of suspicion for laboratory testing to avoid incorrect assumptions of colonization. Common risk factors include recent antibiotic use, elderly (>65 years old), and immunocompromised patients. C. difficile assays should be ordered in an algorithm approach to diagnose an infection rather than colonization. Screening tests are widely available in hospital systems, but novel molecular testing may aid in diagnosis in patients with inconclusive or discordant antigen and toxin test results.  Methods: Data was extracted from PubMed, Scopus, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases based on the keywords \"clostridioides difficile\", \"toxin assay\", and \"toxic megacolon\". The data extracted is based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. A total of 27 reports were included in this systematic review.
RESULTS: Testing patients with a significant gastrointestinal surgical history, hypogammaglobulinemia, inflammatory bowel disease, intensive care unit, and immunocompromised patients for CDI is highly recommended. Diarrhea in these subsets of patients requires correlation of clinical context and an understanding of assay results to avoid over- and under-treating.
CONCLUSIONS: CDI should be considered in all patients with traditional risk factors. Heightened clinical suspicion of CDI is required in patients with hypogammaglobulinemia, transplant recipients, patients with gastrointestinal surgical history, and inflammatory bowel disease. Testing should be limited to patients with clinical manifestations of CDI to ensure a high pretest probability for test interpretation. Healthcare workers should adhere to testing algorithms to optimize yield in the appropriate clinical context. Diagnostic assays should follow a sequential, stepwise approach to categorize the toxin expression status of the bacteria accurately.

UNASSIGNED: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a life-threatening disease, especially in paediatric population. Symptoms of paediatric PH are non-specific. Accurate detection of paediatric PH is helpful for early treatment and mortality reduction. Therefore, we assessed the overall performance of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) for diagnosing PH in paediatric population.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were screened since their respective inceptions until August 2023. A bivariate random model and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model were used together to evaluate and summarize the overall performance of BNP and NT-proBNP for diagnosing paediatric PH.
UNASSIGNED: Eighteen studies using BNP/NT-proBNP were assessed, comprising 1127 samples. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the curve (AUROC) of BNP/NT-proBNP were separately as 0.81, 0.87, 6.33, 0.21, 29.50 and 0.91, suggesting a good diagnostic performance of BNP/NT-proBNP for detecting PH in paediatric population. For BNP, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUROC were 0.83, 0.89, 7.76, 0.19, 40.90 and 0.93, indicating the diagnostic accuracy of BNP for paediatric PH patients was good. For NT-proBNP, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUROC were 0.81, 0.86, 5.59, 0.22, 24.96 and 0.90, showing that NT-proBNP could provide a good value for detecting paediatric PH.
UNASSIGNED: Both BNP and NT-proBNP are good markers for differentiating paediatric PH patients from non-PH individuals.
Accurate detection of paediatric PH is helpful for early treatment and mortality reduction. This study shows that both BNP and NT-proBNP are good markers for detecting paediatric PH. In clinical practice, we recommend that BNP and NT-proBNP are auxiliary biomarkers in diagnosing paediatric PH.

OBJECTIVE: Small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs) form clusters within the genome, representing a mysterious category of small non-coding RNAs. Research has demonstrated that aberrant snoRNAs can contribute to the development of various types of cancers. Recent studies have identified snoRNAs as potentially valuable biomarkers for the diagnosis or/and prognosis of cancers. However, there has been a lack of comprehensive reviews on prognostic and diagnostic snoRNAs across different types of cancers.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of various databases including Google Scholar, Medline, Cochrane, Scopus, PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Ovid-Medline, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang, and SinoMed with a time frame reception to December 30, 2022. A total of 49 relevant articles were included in our analysis, consisting of 21 articles focusing on diagnostic aspects and 41 articles focusing on prognostic aspects. Pooled odds ratio, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and hazard ratio (HR) were utilized to evaluate clinical parameters and overall survival (OS), respectively.
RESULTS: The findings indicated that area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.85, 75%, and 80% in cancer, respectively. There was a possibility that snoRNAs had a positive impact on the diagnosis (risk ratio, RR = 2.95, 95% CI: 2.75-3.16, P = 0.000) and OS (HR = 1) in cancer. Additionally, abnormally expressed snoRNAs were associated with a positive impact on OS time for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (HR: 0.88, 95%Cl: 0.69-1.11, P < 0.00001), colon adenocarcinoma (HR: 0.97, 95%Cl: 0.91-1.03, P < 0.0001), and ovarian cancer (HR: 0.98, 95%Cl: 0.98-0.99, P < 0.00001). However, dysregulated snoRNAs of colon cancer and colorectal cancer had a negative impact on OS time (HR = 3.01 and 1.01 respectively, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The results strongly suggested that snoRNAs could serve as potential novel indicators for prognosis and diagnosis in cancers. This systematic review followed the guidelines of the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PROSPERO register: CRD42020209096).

In this systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA-compliant), we tried to investigate diagnostic and prognostic values of 18F-FDG PET in uveal melanoma. A systematic search was conducted on the main medical literature databases to include studies that evaluated 18F-FDG PET as the imaging modality to evaluate patients with uveal melanoma. Overall, 27 studies were included. Twelve had data about the detection rate of 18F-FDG PET in primary intra-ocular tumours. The pooled sensitivity was 45% (95%CI: 41-50%). Furthermore, studies showed that the larger the primary tumour, the higher its uptake. Among the included studies, 13 assessed 18F-FDG PET in detecting metastasis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 96% (95%CI: 81-99%) and 100% (95%CI: 94-100%), respectively. Regarding liver metastasis, they were 95% (95%CI: 79-99%) and 100% (95%CI: 91-100%), respectively. Noteworthy, the level of 18F-FDG uptake was a strong predictor of patient survival. Lastly, 18F-FDG PET could characterise lesions from the histopathology perspective, distinguishing high-risk from low-risk diseases. Overall, although not reliable in detecting primary intra-ocular tumours, 18F-FDG PET is highly accurate for diagnosing metastatic uveal melanomas. It can also be a highly valuable modality in terms of patient prognostication. Thus, 18F-FDG PET can be recommended in patients diagnosed with uveal melanoma to enhance decision-making and patient management.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a common syndrome of multiorgan system dysfunction secondary to the dysregulated inflammatory response to infection. The role of pancreatic stone protein (PSP) in diagnosing sepsis has been investigated in previous studies. The meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively investigate the diagnostic value of PSP in identifying sepsis.
METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), were systematically searched. Studies investigating the diagnostic performance of PSP were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive Likelihood Ratio (+ LR) and negative Likelihood Ratio (-LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) of summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) were calculated.
RESULTS: The sensitivity of PSP was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.77-0.94), and the pooled specificity was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.65-0.87). Pooled + LR, -LR, and DOR were 4.1 (2.3, 7.3), 0.16 (0.07, 0.34), and 26 (7, 98). The AUC value for the SROC of PSP was 0.90 (0.87, 0.92). The pooled sensitivity, specificity, + LR and - LR, and DOR for PSP among neonates were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.96), 0.66 (95% CI: 0.58, 0.74), 3.97 (95% CI: 0.53, 29.58), 0.13 (95% CI: 0.02, 1.00), and 31.27 (95% CI: 0.97, 1004.60).
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that PSP demonstrated favorable diagnostic accuracy in detecting sepsis. Well-designed studies are warranted to ascertain the value of PSP measurement to guide early empirical antibiotic treatment, particularly in neonates.

We meta-analyzed the diagnostic accuracy of rapid diagnostic tests (dipsticks) and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) method to detect Shigella species. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar from inception to 2023 for studies reporting on the performance of Shigella dipstick and LAMP tests compared with culture or polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Our search identified 2618 studies, of which fourteen met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Ten studies covering 4056 tests (from twelve countries) were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity were 98% (95% CI: 94-100) and 97% (95% CI: 92-99), respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of dipsticks were 95% and 98%, respectively. In contrast, LAMP showed higher pooled sensitivity (100%) and diagnostic odds ratio (431752), but similar specificity (97%). LAMP and dipstick tests exhibited promising performance, suggesting that they could be useful for assisting in the diagnosis of shigellosis.