Predictive and diagnostic test accuracy of ultrasonography in differentiating severe dengue from nonsevere dengue.

Diagnosing severe dengue from those who do not develop complication is important to prevent death. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of ultrasonography in differentiating severe dengue from nonsevere dengue; and to assess if ultrasonography/ultrasound can be used as a predictive (screening) and diagnostic tool in the course of dengue infection. An electronic search was conducted in different databases via OvidSP platform. The included studies were cohort studies between 1995 and 2016 wherein cases were confirmed by dengue blood test. Severity of dengue was assessed and compared using standard WHO references. The methodological quality of the paper was assessed by two independent reviewers by using QUADAS-2 tool. In total 12 studies were included in this review after suitable screening. Overall, the studies included had a low and unclear risk of bias. Seven out of nine studies that compared severe dengue and nonsevere dengue, performed an ultrasonography on gallbladder (wall thickness cutoff-3 mm) with a sensitivity of 24.2-100% and a specificity of 13.2-98.7%. Other parameters such as splenic subcapsular fluid collection, pericardial fluid and hepatic subcapsular fluid collection had a specificity of >90%, though the sensitivity was poor. There were insufficient evidence that ultrasonography is able to differentiate severe dengue from nonsevere dengue accurately. The predictive and diagnostic value of ultrasonography could not be concluded due to insufficient reporting on the temporality of the ultrasonography performed with regard to the diagnosis. However, it might serve as an adjunct investigation to support the clinical diagnosis.

Global dengue death before and after the new World Health Organization 2009 case classification: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of 2009 WHO dengue case classification, no literature was found regarding its effect on dengue death. This study was to evaluate the effect of 2009 WHO dengue case classification towards dengue case fatality rate. METHODS: Various databases were used to search relevant articles since 1995. Studies included were cohort and cross-sectional studies, all patients with dengue infection and must report the number of death or case fatality rate. The Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal checklist was used to evaluate the risk of bias of the full-texts. The studies were grouped according to the classification adopted: WHO 1997 and WHO 2009. Meta-regression was employed using a logistic transformation (log-odds) of the case fatality rate. The result of the meta-regression was the adjusted case fatality rate and odds ratio on the explanatory variables. RESULTS: A total of 77 studies were included in the meta-regression analysis. The case fatality rate for all studies combined was 1.14% with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.82-1.58%. The combined (unadjusted) case fatality rate for 69 studies which adopted WHO 1997 dengue case classification was 1.09% with 95% CI of 0.77-1.55%; and for eight studies with WHO 2009 was 1.62% with 95% CI of 0.64-4.02%. The unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio of case fatality using WHO 2009 dengue case classification was 1.49 (95% CI: 0.52, 4.24) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.26, 2.63) respectively, compared to WHO 1997 dengue case classification. There was an apparent increase in trend of case fatality rate from the year 1992-2016. Neither was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO 2009 dengue case classification might have no effect towards the case fatality rate although the adjusted results indicated a lower case fatality rate. Future studies are required for an update in the meta-regression analysis to confirm the findings.