Literature DB >> 18330582

Diagnostic precision of endoanal MRI in the detection of anal sphincter pathology: a meta-analysis.

Emile Tan1, Ann Anstee, Dow-Mu Koh, Wadyslaw Gedroyc, Paris P Tekkis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic precision of endoanal magnetic resonance imaging in identifying anal sphincter injury and/or atrophy when compared with either endoanal ultrasound or surgical diagnosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Quantitative meta-analysis was performed on nine studies, comparing endoanal MRI with endoanal ultrasound or surgical diagnosis in 157 patients. Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated for each study. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROC) and subgroup analysis were undertaken.
RESULTS: The overall sensitivity and specificity of endoanal MRI for external sphincter injury was 0.78 (95%CI: 0.66-0.84) and 0.66 (95%CI: 0.51-0.79), respectively. For internal sphincter injury detection, this was 0.63 (95%CI: 0.50-0.74) and 0.71 (95%CI: 0.60-0.81), respectively. For detection of atrophy, this was 0.86 (95%CI: 0.71-0.95) and 0.82 (95%CI: 0.65-0.93), respectively. The area under the SROC curve and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.84 (SE = 0.07) and 6.14 (95%CI: 2.17-17.4) for external sphincter injury, 0.79 (SE = 0.07) and 4.60 (95%CI: 1.75-12.15) for internal sphincter injury, and 0.92 (SE = 0.08) and 21.49 (95%CI: 2.87-160.64) for sphincter atrophy.
CONCLUSION: Endoanal MRI was sensitive and specific for the detection of external sphincter injury and especially sphincter atrophy. It may be useful as an alternative to endoanal ultrasound in patients presenting with fecal incontinence, although further clinical studies are needed to identify its best application in clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18330582     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-008-0449-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.571


  42 in total

1.  Endoanal MR imaging of the anal sphincter in fecal incontinence.

Authors:  E Rociu; J Stoker; A W Zwamborn; J S Laméris
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.333

2.  Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in anal endosonography.

Authors:  D M Gold; S Halligan; W A Kmiot; C I Bartram
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  A comparison between electromyography and anal endosonography in mapping external anal sphincter defects.

Authors:  P J Law; M A Kamm; C I Bartram
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  External anal sphincter atrophy on endoanal magnetic resonance imaging adversely affects continence after sphincteroplasty.

Authors:  J W Briel; J Stoker; E Rociu; J S Laméris; W C Hop; W R Schouten
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

Authors:  R Jaeschke; G Guyatt; D L Sackett
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations.

Authors:  L E Moses; D Shapiro; B Littenberg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1993-07-30       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  External anal sphincter defects: correlation between pre-operative anal endosonography and intraoperative findings.

Authors:  G Romano; G Rotondano; P Esposito; L Pellecchia; A Novi
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Relationship between sphincter morphology on endoanal MRI and histopathological aspects of the external anal sphincter.

Authors:  J W Briel; D D Zimmerman; J Stoker; E Rociu; J S Laméris; W J Mooi; W R Schouten
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Endoanal magnetic resonance imaging versus endosonography.

Authors:  J Stoker; S M Hussain; J S Laméris
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 10.  Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.

Authors:  Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; Jeroen G Lijmer; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-01-04
View more
  4 in total

1.  An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female anorectal dysfunction.

Authors:  Abdul H Sultan; Ash Monga; Joseph Lee; Anton Emmanuel; Christine Norton; Giulio Santoro; Tracy Hull; Bary Berghmans; Stuart Brody; Bernard T Haylen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-10-24       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Severe anorectal injury secondary to jet ski accident: An important and increasing mechanism of injury.

Authors:  Donald Morice; Matthew A R Stokes; James Davey; Stewart Skinner
Journal:  Trauma Case Rep       Date:  2022-10-04

3.  Clinical symptoms related to anal sphincter defects and atrophy on external phased-array MR imaging.

Authors:  Imke Maria Henricus Kessels; Jurgen Jacobus Fütterer; Abdul Hameed Sultan; Kirsten Birgit Kluivers
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Comparison of 3D endoanal ultrasound and external phased array magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

Authors:  Jaan Kirss; Heikki Huhtinen; Eini Niskanen; Jyrki Ruohonen; Marja Kallio-Packalen; Sarita Victorzon; Mikael Victorzon; Tarja Pinta
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 5.315

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.