Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Commercial Tests for Detection of Shiga Toxin–Producing Escherichia coli: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author:

Tarr Gillian A M1,Lin Chu Yang2,Vandermeer Ben3,Lorenzetti Diane L4,Tarr Phillip I5,Chui Linda6,Hartling Lisa3,Freedman Stephen B7

Affiliation:

1. Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

2. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

4. Health Sciences Library, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

5. Department of Pediatrics, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO

6. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Alberta and Alberta Precision Laboratories-ProvLab, Edmonton, AB, Canada

7. Sections of Pediatric Emergency Medicine and Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Alberta Children's Hospital and Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

Abstract

Abstract Background Rapid detection of Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli (STEC) enables appropriate monitoring and treatment. We synthesized available evidence to compare the performance of enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and PCR tests for the detection of STEC. Methods We searched published and gray literature for studies of STEC EIA and/or PCR diagnostic test accuracy relative to reference standards including at least one nucleic acid amplification test. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality with the second version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Bivariate random effects models were used to meta-analyze the clinical sensitivity and specificity of commercial EIA and PCR STEC diagnostic tests, and summary receiver operator characteristic curves were constructed. We evaluated the certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results We identified 43 articles reflecting 25 260 specimens. Meta-analysis of EIA and PCR accuracy included 25 and 22 articles, respectively. STEC EIA pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.681 (95% CI, 0.571–0.773; very low certainty of evidence) and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.998–1.00; moderate certainty of evidence), respectively. STEC PCR pooled sensitivity and specificity were 1.00 (95% CI, 0.904–1.00; low certainty of evidence) and 0.999 (95% CI, 0.997–0.999; low certainty of evidence), respectively. Certainty of evidence was downgraded because of high risk of bias. Conclusions PCR tests to identify the presence of STEC are more sensitive than EIA tests, with no meaningful loss of specificity. However, given the low certainty of evidence, our results may overestimate the difference in performance.

Funder

BioMérieux and Luminex. L. Chui

Alberta Children s Hospital Foundation Professorship in Child Health and Wellness

Alberta Innovates Team Collaborative Research Innovation Opportunity

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3