Non‐invasive skin autofluorescence as a screening method for diabetic retinopathy

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a public health problem and a common cause of blindness. It is diagnosed by fundus examination; however, this is a costly and time‐consuming method. Non‐invasive skin autofluorescence (SAF) may be an accessible, fast and simple alternative for screening and early diagnos...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews 2024-02, Vol.40 (2), p.e3721-n/a
Hauptverfasser: Martínez‐García, Irene, Cavero‐Redondo, Iván, Álvarez‐Bueno, Celia, Pascual‐Morena, Carlos, Gómez‐Guijarro, María Dolores, Saz‐Lara, Alicia
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a public health problem and a common cause of blindness. It is diagnosed by fundus examination; however, this is a costly and time‐consuming method. Non‐invasive skin autofluorescence (SAF) may be an accessible, fast and simple alternative for screening and early diagnosis of DR. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of SAF as a screening method for DR. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was performed. Random effects models for sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) value and 95% CIs were used to calculate test accuracy. In addition, hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves (HSROC) were used to summarise the overall test performance. Four studies were included in the meta‐analysis. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.79 (95% CI 0.72–0.88; I2 = 0.0%) and 0.54 (95% CI 0.32–0.92; I2 = 97.0%), respectively. The dOR value for the diagnosis of DR using SAF was 5.11 (95% CI 1.81–14.48: I2 = 85.9%). The PRL was 2.17 (95% CI 0.62–7.64) and the NRL was 0.27 (95% CI 0.07–1.03). Heterogeneity was not relevant in sensitivity and considerable in specificity. The 95% confidence region of the HSROC included all studies. SAF as a screening test for DR shows sufficient accuracy for its use in clinical settings. SAF may be an appropriate method for DR screening, and further research is needed to recommend it as a diagnostic method.
ISSN:1520-7552
1520-7560
1520-7560
DOI:10.1002/dmrr.3721