Premium
Estimating the diagnostic accuracy of the ankle–brachial pressure index for detecting peripheral arterial disease in people with diabetes: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Author(s) -
Chuter V. H.,
Searle A.,
Barwick A.,
Golledge J.,
Leigh L.,
Oldmeadow C.,
Peterson B.,
Tehan P.,
Twigg S. M.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
diabetic medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.474
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1464-5491
pISSN - 0742-3071
DOI - 10.1111/dme.14379
Subject(s) - medicine , receiver operating characteristic , diagnostic odds ratio , confidence interval , meta analysis , cochrane library , odds ratio , area under the curve , diabetes mellitus , ankle , surgery , endocrinology
Abstract Aim To systematically evaluate research investigating the accuracy of the ankle–brachial index (ABI) for diagnosing peripheral artery disease (PAD) in people with diabetes, as the accuracy is thought to be reduced in this cohort. Methods A database search of EBSCO Megafile Premier, Embase and The Cochrane Library was conducted to 28 February 2019. Prospective and retrospective investigations of the diagnostic accuracy of the ABI for PAD in people with diabetes using an imaging reference standard were eligible. Sensitivity and specify of the ABI and bivariate meta‐analysis against reference tests, or a standard summary receiver operating curve analysis (SROC) was performed. Results Thirty‐three studies met the inclusion criteria. ABI was compared with angiography in 12 studies and with colour duplex ultrasound (CDUS) in 21 studies. A SROC analysis of studies using angiography as the reference standard found a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 9.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.61 to 22.69], and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.86). Bivariate analysis of studies using CDUS demonstrated mean sensitivity of 0.60 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.71; P = 0.097) and mean specificity of 0.87 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.92; P < 0.001) with a DOR of 9.76 (95% CI 5.24 to 18.20; P < 0.0001) and AUC 0.72. Conclusions These results suggest the ABI has a high specificity but lower sensitivity in detecting imaging diagnosed PAD in people with diabetes. The low probability of the testing being able to rule diagnosis in or out suggest that the ABI has limited effectiveness for early detection of PAD in this cohort.