We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography in Retained Soft Tissue Foreign Bodies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Academic Emergency Medicine 2015 July
OBJECTIVES: Open wounds with the potential for retained foreign bodies are frequently seen in the emergency department (ED). Common foreign bodies, such as wood or glass, are often missed on physical examination and conventional radiography. The increased use of ultrasonography (US) in the ED presents an opportunity to better identify retained soft tissue foreign bodies, and understanding of its test characteristics is desirable. The authors set out to determine the test characteristics of US for detection of soft tissue foreign bodies by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature.
METHODS: This was a thorough, systematic review of OVID Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases and a limited review of Directory of Open Access Journals, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify clinical studies examining the diagnostic accuracy of US in the identification of retained soft tissue foreign bodies. Studies were selected for full-text review by two independent reviewers to determine if they met inclusion criteria. Results were pooled for test characteristics using STATA and assessed for risk of bias and applicability using the QUADAS-2 tool.
RESULTS: This systematic search strategy identified 5,059 unique articles, and 17 articles met inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 72% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 57% to 83%) and 92% (95% CI = 88% to 95%). Overall quality of the studies was low and interstudy heterogeneity was high (I(2) = 90%, 95% CI = 80% to 100%).
CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonography is highly specific and moderately sensitive in the identification of retained soft tissue foreign bodies; however, studies to date have a high degree of heterogeneity and a high risk of bias.
METHODS: This was a thorough, systematic review of OVID Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases and a limited review of Directory of Open Access Journals, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify clinical studies examining the diagnostic accuracy of US in the identification of retained soft tissue foreign bodies. Studies were selected for full-text review by two independent reviewers to determine if they met inclusion criteria. Results were pooled for test characteristics using STATA and assessed for risk of bias and applicability using the QUADAS-2 tool.
RESULTS: This systematic search strategy identified 5,059 unique articles, and 17 articles met inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 72% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 57% to 83%) and 92% (95% CI = 88% to 95%). Overall quality of the studies was low and interstudy heterogeneity was high (I(2) = 90%, 95% CI = 80% to 100%).
CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonography is highly specific and moderately sensitive in the identification of retained soft tissue foreign bodies; however, studies to date have a high degree of heterogeneity and a high risk of bias.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app