We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Sensitivity of temporal artery biopsy in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Rheumatology 2020 May 2
OBJECTIVES: Temporal artery biopsy (TAB) is a reference test for the diagnosis of GCA but reveals inflammatory changes only in a subset of patients. The lack of knowledge of TAB sensitivity hampers comparisons with non-invasive techniques such as temporal artery ultrasonography. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to estimate the sensitivity of TAB in GCA and to identify factors that may influence the estimate.
METHODS: A systematic literature review involved searching electronic databases and cross-references. Eligibility criteria included publications reporting at least 30 GCA cases fulfilling the original or modified 1990 ACR classification criteria. The pooled proportion of TAB-positive GCA cases was calculated by using aggregated-data meta-analysis with a random-effects model and assessment of heterogeneity with the I2 statistic. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were used to examine the effect of patient and study characteristics on TAB positivity.
RESULTS: Among 3820 publications screened, 32 studies (3092 patients) published during 1993-2017 were analysed. The pooled proportion of TAB-positive GCA cases was 77.3% (95% CI: 71.8, 81.9%), with high between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 90%). The proportion of TAB-positive cases was slightly higher in publications before than in 2012 and after (P = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The estimated sensitivity of 77% provides indirect evidence that TAB is not less sensitive than temporal artery imaging. The unexplained high between-study heterogeneity could result from differences in TAB sampling, processing or interpretation. The decrease in TAB-positive GCA cases over time could reflect an increasing propensity for clinicians to accept a GCA diagnosis without proof by TAB.
METHODS: A systematic literature review involved searching electronic databases and cross-references. Eligibility criteria included publications reporting at least 30 GCA cases fulfilling the original or modified 1990 ACR classification criteria. The pooled proportion of TAB-positive GCA cases was calculated by using aggregated-data meta-analysis with a random-effects model and assessment of heterogeneity with the I2 statistic. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were used to examine the effect of patient and study characteristics on TAB positivity.
RESULTS: Among 3820 publications screened, 32 studies (3092 patients) published during 1993-2017 were analysed. The pooled proportion of TAB-positive GCA cases was 77.3% (95% CI: 71.8, 81.9%), with high between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 90%). The proportion of TAB-positive cases was slightly higher in publications before than in 2012 and after (P = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The estimated sensitivity of 77% provides indirect evidence that TAB is not less sensitive than temporal artery imaging. The unexplained high between-study heterogeneity could result from differences in TAB sampling, processing or interpretation. The decrease in TAB-positive GCA cases over time could reflect an increasing propensity for clinicians to accept a GCA diagnosis without proof by TAB.
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
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
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