ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The 'speed bump sign' is a clinical symptom characterised by aggravated abdominal pain while driving over speed bumps. This study aimed to perform a diagnostic meta-analysis, rate the certainty of evidence (CoE) and analyse the applicability of the speed bump sign in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four databanks and websites were systemically searched, and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was assessed by MIDAS commands in Stata 15. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was applied to examine the CoE. RESULTS: Four studies with 343 participants were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.94 (95% CI (confidence interval) = 0.83-0.98; I2 = 79%) and 0.49 (95% CI = 0.33-0.66; I2 = 67%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.74-0.81). The diagnostic odds ratio was 14.1 (95% CI = 3.6-55.7). The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR (+) and LR (-)) were 1.84 (95% CI = 1.30-2.61) and 0.13 (95% CI = 0.04-0.41), respectively. According to Fagan's nomogram plot, when the pretest probabilities were 25%, 50% and 75%, the related posttest probabilities increased to 38%, 65% and 85% calculated through LR (+), respectively, and the posttest probabilities were 4%, 12% and 28% calculated through LR (-), respectively. The overall CoEs were low and very low in sensitivity and specificity, respectively. CONCLUSION: Current evidence shows that the speed bump sign is a useful 'rule-out' test for diagnosing acute appendicitis. With good accessibility, the speed bump sign may be added as a routine part of taking the history of patients with abdominal pain.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Currently, the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) system is used in hepatectomy patients for tumor staging of HCC patients. However this can only evaluate the histopathological factor. MELD score is an objective measure for liver function widely used as a severity index for priority on the waiting list for liver transplantation. Here we suggest a modified TNM staging system based on the MELD score and test its relation with post-operative outcome of HCC. METHODOLOGY: We retrospectively collected 922 HCC patients undergoing hepatic resection, with TNM stage I (n=239), stage II (n=375) and stage III (n=308); giving points 0 to 2 for each stage (from I to III). Pre-operative MELD score was calculated and assigned 0 points for MELD <6; 1 for 6-8; 2 for >8. The two scores were added together to form a modified MELD-base TNM stage score and tested the correlation of this new scoring system with outcome after liver resection. RESULTS: The modified MELD-base TNM stage score resulted in score 0 (n=114), score 1 (n=247), score 2 (n=335), score 3 (n=164), and score 4 (n=62). The disease-free survival in each group showed significant difference (p<0.05), the lower the score, the better the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The MELD-based TNM staging system reliably separates patients with HCC into homogeneous groups with respect to post-resectional prognosis. Further prospective validation studies are required to confirm the feasibility of this strategy.
