Objective To systematically review the diagnostic value of Presepsin for sepsis. Methods Literatures were searched from PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 6, 2017), EMbase, CNKI, CBM, VIP, and WanFang database, and the time was from inception to June 2017, to collect diagnostic studies about Presepsin for sepsis. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies by QUADAS-2 tool. Then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 and Meta-Disc 1.4 software. Pooled sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) of summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) were calculated to assess the diagnostic value of individual diagnostic tests. Results A total of 23 studies with 2 925 sepsis patients and 1 852 controls were finally included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the pooled Sen, Spe, LR+, LR-, DOR, and AUC was 0.80 ［95% CI was (0.78, 0.81), P<0.000 1］, 0.83 ［95%CI was (0.81, 0. 84), P<0.000 1］, 4.78 ［95%CI was (3.62, 6.31), P<0.000 1］, 0.22 ［95%CI was (0.18, 0.27), P<0.000 1］, 23.64 ［95%CI was (16.00, 34.92), P<0.000 1］, and 0.91 ［95%CI was (0.89, 0.94), P<0.001］, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the pooled Sen, Spe, LR+, LR-, DOR, and AUC in Caucasian was 0.83 ［95% CI was (0.80, 0.86), P=0.000 1］, 0.79 ［95% CI was (0.76, 0.82), P<0.000 1］, 4.38 ［95%CI was (2.40, 8.02), P<0.000 1］, 0.23 ［95%CI was (0.16, 0.31), P=0.007 8］, 21.09 ［95% CI was (8.82, 50.41), P<0.000 1］, and 0.91 ［95%CI was (0.87, 0.92), P<0.001］ respectively, and in Asian was 0.79 ［95% CI was (0.77, 0.80), P<0.000 1］, 0.85 ［95%CI was (0.83, 0.87), P<0.000 1］,4.74 ［95%CI was (3.82, 5.89), P=0.011 1］, 0.22 ［95% CI was (0.17, 0.28), P<0.000 1］, 24.95 ［95%CI was (16.07, 38.74), P<0.000 1］, and 0.92 ［95%CI was (0.90, 0.95), P=0.001］ respectively, there was no significant difference between Caucasian and Asian in diagnostic accuracy of Presepsin (Z=0.41, P>0.05). Conclusion Current evidence indicates that Presepsin has great early diagnostic value for sepsis.
Objective To evaluate the significance of the ultrasound elastography (UE) strain ratio (SR) in the diagnosis of breast nodule by meta-analysis. Methods A computer-based online search was conducted in PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 6, 2017), EMbase, CNKI, VIP, CBM, WanFang data databases, and so on (establishment time to June 2017), to collect the relevant diagnostic trials of the SR for breast nodules. Two reviewers independently screened literatures, extracted data, and evaluated the methodological quality of included studies. The meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 12.0 and Meta-Disc 1.4 software, and the combined indexes included sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR–), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Results A total of 26 studies were finally included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, the pooled Sen, Spe, LR+, LR–, and DOR was 0.88 (95% CI was 0.87 to 0.90), 0.85 (95% CI was 0.84 to 0.86), 6.66 (95% CI was 5.26 to 8.43), 0.14 (95% CI was 0.11 to 0.17), and 53.37 (95% CI was 34.96 to 81.49), respectively, P<0.000 1. Conclusion SR has high diagnostic accuracy in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast nodules, it is worthy of widely utilized in the clinic.