Diagnostic accuracy of water-soluble contrast enema, contrast-enema computed tomography and endoscopy in detecting anastomotic leakage after (Colo) proctectomy: A meta-analysis

被引:7
作者
Chierici, Andrea [1 ]
Granieri, Stefano [2 ]
Frontali, Alice [3 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Hosp Univ Nice, Transplantat Hepat Hop Archet 2, Serv Chirurg Digest, Nice, France
[2] Vimercate Hosp, Gen Surg Unit, ASST Brianza, Via Santi Cosma & Damiano, Vimercate, Italy
[3] IRCCS San Raffaele, Coloproctol & IBD Surg Unit, Milan, Italy
关键词
anastomotic leakage; colorectal surgery; diagnostic accuracy; RECTAL-CANCER; DIVERTING STOMA; EXCISION; SURGERY; CLOSURE;
D O I
10.1111/codi.16591
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundAnastomotic leakage (AL) as a result of creation of a colorectal/anal anastomosis still represents a frequent complication of colorectal surgery, with short- and long-term consequences on postoperative morbidity, quality of life and oncological outcomes. However, early diagnosis of AL may result in improved outcomes. The aims of this study were to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE), contrast enema computed tomography (CECT) and endoscopy in identifying AL and to identify the diagnostic procedure that is most accurate. MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of 19 studies accounting for a total of 25 tests reporting diagnostic accuracy estimates was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines up to June 2021. For the diagnostic tests we evaluated the pooled estimates and conducted pairwise comparisons. ResultsFor WSCE, the pooled sensitivity was 0.50, the pooled specificity was 0.99 and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.91. For endoscopy, the pooled sensitivity was 0.69, specificity was 1.00 and AUC was 0.99. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for CECT were 0.89 and 1.00, respectively; the AUC was 0.99. The comparison between CECT and WSCE highlighted a significantly greater sensitivity (p = 0.04) for CECT, whereas no difference was found for specificity. Compared with CECT, endoscopy was not significantly more accurate in terms of either sensitivity or specificity. Endoscopy was found to be significantly more specific than WSCE (p = 0.031) but no difference was found for sensitivity. ConclusionWater-soluble contrast enema, endoscopy and CECT have an elevated diagnostic accuracy. However, WSCE is less accurate than either endoscopy or CECT. Although greater sensitivity was demonstrated for CECT compared with endoscopy, this was not significant.
引用
收藏
页码:1371 / 1380
页数:10
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]   EARLY POSTOPERATIVE CONTRAST RADIOLOGY IN THE ASSESSMENT OF COLORECTAL ANASTOMOTIC INTEGRITY [J].
AKYOL, AM ;
MCGREGOR, JR ;
GALLOWAY, DJ ;
GEORGE, WD .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE, 1992, 7 (03) :141-143
[2]  
Bertoni CB, 2009, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V136, pA893
[3]   Anastomotic Leakage and Chronic Presacral Sinus Formation After Low Anterior Resection Results From a Large Cross-sectional Study [J].
Borstlap, Wernard A. A. ;
Westerduin, Emma ;
Aukema, Tjeerd S. ;
Bemelman, Willem A. ;
Tanis, Pieter J. .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2017, 266 (05) :870-877
[4]   Can end-to-end anastomosis reduce the risks of anastomotic leak compared to side-to-end anastomosis? A comparative study of 518 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for low- or mid-rectal cancer [J].
Chierici, A. ;
Frontali, A. ;
Godefroy, W. ;
Spiezio, G. ;
Panis, Y. .
TECHNIQUES IN COLOPROCTOLOGY, 2021, 25 (09) :1019-1026
[5]   Contrast radiography before diverting stoma closure in rectal cancer is not necessary on a routine basis [J].
Climent, Marta ;
Pascual, Marta ;
Alonso, Sandra ;
Salvans, Silvia ;
Jose Gil, Ma ;
Grande, Luis ;
Pera, Miguel .
CIRUGIA ESPANOLA, 2019, 97 (03) :145-149
[6]  
da Silva G M, 2004, Colorectal Dis, V6, P117
[7]  
Deeks J., 2013, Guide to the Contents of a Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Protocol
[8]   The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed [J].
Deeks, JJ ;
Macaskill, P ;
Irwig, L .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (09) :882-893
[9]   METAANALYSIS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
DERSIMONIAN, R ;
LAIRD, N .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1986, 7 (03) :177-188
[10]  
Dwamena B, MIDAS: Stata module for meta-analytical integration of diagnostic test accuracy studies