Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of clinical signs, symptoms, and imaging findings in patients with suspected renal colic
by
Dahm, Philipp
, Koziarz, Alex
, Benipal, Simranjeet
, Nishijima, Daniel K.
, Jung, Jae Hung
, Gerardo, Charles J.
, Raja, Ali S.
in
Accuracy
/ diagnostic accuracy
/ Diagnostic tests
/ evidence‐based clinical practice
/ Evidence‐Based Emergency Medicine
/ Kidney stones
/ Laboratories
/ Meta-analysis
/ Pain
/ physical examination findings
/ Radiation
/ renal colic
/ Risk factors
/ Systematic review
/ Systematic Review‐meta‐analysis
/ Urinary tract diseases
2022
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of clinical signs, symptoms, and imaging findings in patients with suspected renal colic
by
Dahm, Philipp
, Koziarz, Alex
, Benipal, Simranjeet
, Nishijima, Daniel K.
, Jung, Jae Hung
, Gerardo, Charles J.
, Raja, Ali S.
in
Accuracy
/ diagnostic accuracy
/ Diagnostic tests
/ evidence‐based clinical practice
/ Evidence‐Based Emergency Medicine
/ Kidney stones
/ Laboratories
/ Meta-analysis
/ Pain
/ physical examination findings
/ Radiation
/ renal colic
/ Risk factors
/ Systematic review
/ Systematic Review‐meta‐analysis
/ Urinary tract diseases
2022
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of clinical signs, symptoms, and imaging findings in patients with suspected renal colic
by
Dahm, Philipp
, Koziarz, Alex
, Benipal, Simranjeet
, Nishijima, Daniel K.
, Jung, Jae Hung
, Gerardo, Charles J.
, Raja, Ali S.
in
Accuracy
/ diagnostic accuracy
/ Diagnostic tests
/ evidence‐based clinical practice
/ Evidence‐Based Emergency Medicine
/ Kidney stones
/ Laboratories
/ Meta-analysis
/ Pain
/ physical examination findings
/ Radiation
/ renal colic
/ Risk factors
/ Systematic review
/ Systematic Review‐meta‐analysis
/ Urinary tract diseases
2022
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of clinical signs, symptoms, and imaging findings in patients with suspected renal colic
Journal Article
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of clinical signs, symptoms, and imaging findings in patients with suspected renal colic
2022
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical signs, symptoms, laboratory investigations, and imaging modalities commonly used in patients with clinically suspected renal colic.
We conducted this systematic review and meta‐analysis according to an a priori, registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42017055153). A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to July 2, 2020. We assessed the risk of bias using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies–2, calculated likelihood ratios (LRs), and applied a random‐effects model for meta‐analysis.
Among 7641 references screened, 76 were included in the systematic review and 53 were included in the meta‐analyis. The overall pooled prevalence for ureteral stones was 63% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58%–67%). No individual demographic feature, symptom, or sign when present had an LR+ ≥2.0 for identifying ureterolithiasis. A (Sex, Timing and Origin of pain, race, presence or absence of Nausea, and Erythrocytes) STONE score ≥10 increased (sensitivity 0.49, specificity 0.91, LR 5.3 [95% CI, 4.1–6.7]) and a STONE score <6 reduced the likelihood of ureteral stones (sensitivity 0.94, specificity 0.43, LR 0.15 [95% CI, 0.10–0.22]). Standard‐dose (sensitivity 0.96, specificity 0.94, LR+ 16 [95% CI, 11–23], LR− 0.05 [95% CI, 0.03–0.07]) and low‐dose computed tomography (CT) scanning (sensitivity 0.93, specificity 0.94, LR+ 17 [95% CI, 8.8–31], LR− 0.08 [95% CI, 0.03–0.19]) were the most useful imaging techniques for identifying patients with or without ureteral stones.
Individual signs, symptoms, or the presence of microscopic hematuria do not substantially impact the likelihood of ureteral stones in patients with clinically suspected renal colic. The STONE score at high and low thresholds and a modified STONE score at a high threshold may sufficiently guide physicians’ decisions to obtain imaging. Low‐dose, non‐contrast CT imaging provides superior diagnostic accuracy compared with all other imaging index tests that are comparable with standard CT imaging. Limitations of the evidence include methodological shortcomings and considerable heterogeneity of the included studies.
Publisher
Elsevier Inc,John Wiley & Sons, Inc,John Wiley and Sons Inc,Elsevier
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.