Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for deep vein thrombosis

Background Ultrasound (US) has largely replaced contrast venography as the definitive diagnostic test for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We aimed to derive a definitive estimate of the diagnostic accuracy of US for clinically suspected DVT and identify study-level factors that might predict accuracy. Methods We undertook a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of diagnostic cohort studies that compared US to contrast venography in patients with suspected DVT. We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Database of Reviews of Effectiveness, the ACP Journal Club, and citation lists (1966 to April 2004). Random effects meta-analysis was used to derive pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. Random effects meta-regression was used to identify study-level covariates that predicted diagnostic performance. Results We identified 100 cohorts comparing US to venography in patients with suspected DVT. Overall sensitivity for proximal DVT (95% confidence interval) was 94.2% (93.2 to 95.0), for distal DVT was 63.5% (59.8 to 67.0), and specificity was 93.8% (93.1 to 94.4). Duplex US had pooled sensitivity of 96.5% (95.1 to 97.6) for proximal DVT, 71.2% (64.6 to 77.2) for distal DVT and specificity of 94.0% (92.8 to 95.1). Triplex US had pooled sensitivity of 96.4% (94.4 to 97.1%) for proximal DVT, 75.2% (67.7 to 81.6) for distal DVT and specificity of 94.3% (92.5 to 95.8). Compression US alone had pooled sensitivity of 93.8 % (92.0 to 95.3%) for proximal DVT, 56.8% (49.0 to 66.4) for distal DVT and specificity of 97.8% (97.0 to 98.4). Sensitivity was higher in more recently published studies and in cohorts with higher prevalence of DVT and more proximal DVT, and was lower in cohorts that reported interpretation by a radiologist. Specificity was higher in cohorts that excluded patients with previous DVT. No studies were identified that compared repeat US to venography in all patients. Repeat US appears to have a positive yield of 1.3%, with 89% of these being confirmed by venography. Conclusion Combined colour-doppler US techniques have optimal sensitivity, while compression US has optimal specificity for DVT. However, all estimates are subject to substantial unexplained heterogeneity. The role of repeat scanning is very uncertain and based upon limited data

Neurobiological basis and risk factors of persistent fatigue and concentration problems after COVID-19: study protocol for a prospective case–control study (VeCosCO)

Introduction: The risk factors for persistent fatigue and cognitive complaints after infection with SARS-CoV-2 and the underlying pathophysiology are largely unknown. Both clinical factors and cognitive-behavioural factors have been suggested to play a role in the perpetuation of complaints. A neurobiological aetiology, such as neuroinflammation, could be the underlying pathophysiological mechanism for persisting complaints. To unravel factors associated with persisting complaints, VeCosCO will compare individuals with and without persistent fatigue and cognitive complaints >3 months after infection with SARS-CoV-2. The study consists of two work packages. The first work package aims to (1) investigate the relation between persisting complaints and neuropsychological functioning; (2) determine risk factors and at-risk phenotypes for the development of persistent fatigue and cognitive complaints, including the presence of postexertional malaise and (3) describe consequences of persistent complaints on quality of life, healthcare consumption and physical functioning. The second work package aims to (1) determine the presence of neuroinflammation with [18F]DPA-714 whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) scans in patients with persisting complaints and (2) explore the relationship between (neuro)inflammation and brain structure and functioning measured with MRI. / Methods and analysis: This is a prospective case–control study in participants with and without persistent fatigue and cognitive complaints, >3 months after laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants will be mainly included from existing COVID-19 cohorts in the Netherlands covering the full spectrum of COVID-19 acute disease severity. Primary outcomes are neuropsychological functioning, postexertional malaise, neuroinflammation measured using [18F]DPA-714 PET, and brain functioning and structure using (f)MRI. / Ethics and dissemination: Work package 1 (NL79575.018.21) and 2 (NL77033.029.21) were approved by the medical ethical review board of the Amsterdam University Medical Centers (The Netherlands). Informed consent is required prior to participation in the study. Results of this study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and shared with the key population

The Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome (congenital absence of uterus and vagina) – phenotypic manifestations and genetic approaches

The Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome affects at least 1 out of 4500 women and has for a long time been considered as a sporadic anomaly. Congenital absence of upper vagina and uterus is the prime feature of the disease which, in addition, is often found associated with unilateral renal agenesis or adysplasia as well as skeletal malformations (MURCS association). The phenotypic manifestations of MRKH overlap various other syndromes or associations and thus require accurate delineation. Since MRKH manifests itself in males, the term GRES syndrome (Genital, Renal, Ear, Skeletal) might be more appropriate when applied to both sexes. The MRKH syndrome, when described in familial aggregates, seems to be transmitted as an autosomal dominant trait with an incomplete degree of penetrance and variable expressivity. This suggests the involvement of either mutations in a major developmental gene or a limited chromosomal deletion. Until recently progress in understanding the genetics of MRKH syndrome has been slow, however, now HOX genes have been shown to play key roles in body patterning and organogenesis, and in particular during genital tract development. Expression and/or function defects of one or several HOX genes may account for this syndrome