Diagnostic Accuracy of Tests Based on Radiologic Measurements of Dogs and Cats: A Systematic Review

Abstract

A systematic review of diagnostic tests based on radiologic measurements of structures in dogs and cats was done in order to reach generalizable conclusions about the value of making such measurements. Literature search was done using the ISI Web of Knowledge SM for studies in the subject category Veterinary sciences. Studies were eligible for inclusion that employed length, angle, area or volume measurements from radiographic, ultrasonographic, CT or MR images of dogs or cats as a diagnostic test for a naturally occurring condition, compared the results of imaging with a reference standard, included at least 10 subjects, and sufficient data that a 2 × 2 table of results could be constructed. Quality of studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Twenty-six studies were found describing 40 tests that satisfied the inclusion criteria. Tests were radiographic in 22 (55%) instances and ultrasonographic in 18 (45%). Quality of studies was generally low, with a risk of bias in patient selection in 92% studies, performance of the index test in 73% studies, and patient flow in 42% studies. Median (range) number of subjects was 64 (20-305), sensitivity was 77% (38-99%), specificity was 82% (50-99%), positive likelihood ratio was 4.1 (1-103), and negative likelihood ratio was 0.29 (0.01-1). Two studies that compared accuracy of radiographic measurements to subjective image interpretation alone found no difference. Evidence is weak that radiologic measurements of structures in dogs and cats are useful for diagnosis, hence measurements should not be emphasized as a basis for diagnosis in either teaching or clinical imaging reports. C 2014 American College of Veterinary Radiology.

Ultrasonographic findings of shoulder teno-muscular structures in symptomatic and asymptomatic dogs

“…Likelihood ratios provide a statistical method for assessing the clinical usefulness of a diagnostic test for ruling out (negative likelihood ratio, NLR < 0.25) and ruling in (positive likelihood ratio, PLR > 4) a disease [6]. To avoid extreme calculated values, the results with zero false positives or false negatives were modified by adding 1 subject into each cell of the 2 × 2 table [7]. Odds ratios (OR) among the ultrasonographic abnormalities were also calculated for determining the presence of SST lesions, IST lesions, BT lesions, fluid accumulation, muscular lacerations and bone surface irregularities.…”

Comparison of Computed Tomography and Abdominal Radiography for Detection of Canine Mechanical Intestinal Obstruction

“…In a study of 100 consecutive people suspected of having small bowel obstruction, experienced radiologists were more accurate than less experienced radiologists in the evaluation of abdominal radiographs . The use of measurements in radiology as a sole means of making a radiographic diagnosis is not advised . A single measurement does not take into account the relationships of other radiographic findings and clinical history on the overall interpretation of the study.…”

Role of strain elastography in differentiating malignant hypoechoic splenic lesions in dogs: Preliminary results

“…Likelihood ratios provide a statistical method for assessing the clinical usefulness of a diagnostic test for ruling out (NLR<0.25) and ruling in (PLR>4) a disease (Wall et al, 2015). To avoid extreme calculated values, the results with zero false positive or false negative were modified by adding 1 subject into each cell of the 2×2 table (Lamb & Nelson;.…”