Diagnostic Performance of Conventional X-ray for Detecting Foreign Bodies in the Upper Digestive Tract: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-Analysis

Foreign body (FB) ingestion is a common clinical problem in acute settings. Detecting FBs in the upper digestive tract is challenging. The conventional X-ray is usually the first-line imaging tool to detect FBs. However, its diagnostic performance is inconsistent in the literature. In this study, we...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diagnostics (Basel) 2021-04, Vol.11 (5), p.790
Hauptverfasser: Yang, Ta-Wei, Yu, Yi-Chung, Lin, Yen-Yue, Hsu, Shih-Chang, Chu, Karen Chia-Wen, Hsu, Chin-Wang, Bai, Chyi-Huey, Chang, Cheng-Kuang, Hsu, Yuan-Pin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Foreign body (FB) ingestion is a common clinical problem in acute settings. Detecting FBs in the upper digestive tract is challenging. The conventional X-ray is usually the first-line imaging tool to detect FBs. However, its diagnostic performance is inconsistent in the literature. In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic performance of the conventional X-ray for detecting FBs in the upper digestive tract. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus until 1 August 2020. Prospective or retrospective studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of conventional X-rays for detecting FBs in the upper digestive tract in patients of all ages were included. The Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy-2 tool was used to review the quality of included studies. We used a bivariate random-effects model to calculate diagnostic accuracy parameters. Heterogeneity was assessed using I statistics. We included 17 studies ( = 4809) in the meta-analysis. Of the 17 studies, most studies were rated as having a high risk of bias. Conventional X-rays had a pooled sensitivity of 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36-0.77, I = 98.52) and a pooled specificity of 0.94 (95% CI = 0.87-0.98, I = 94.49) for detecting FBs in the upper digestive tract. The heterogeneity was considerable. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.88-0.93). Deek's funnel plot asymmetry test results revealed no significant publication bias ( = 0.41). The overall sensitivity and specificity of conventional X-rays were low and high, respectively, for detecting FBs in the upper digestive tract. Hence, conventional X-rays to exclude patients without upper FBs in the digestive tract are not recommended. Further imaging or endoscopic examinations should be performed for at-risk patients.
ISSN:2075-4418
2075-4418
DOI:10.3390/diagnostics11050790