Platelet count, spleen length, and platelet count-to-spleen length ratio for the diagnosis of oesophageal varices in people with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend screening of people with oesophageal varices via oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy at the time of diagnosis of hepatic cirrhosis. This requires that people repeatedly undergo unpleasant invasive procedures with their attendant risks, although half of these people have no identifiable oesophageal varices 10 years after the initial diagnosis of cirrhosis. Platelet count, spleen length, and platelet count-to-spleen length ratio are non-invasive tests proposed as triage tests for the diagnosis of oesophageal varices. OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives To determine the diagnostic accuracy of platelet count, spleen length, and platelet count-to-spleen length ratio for the diagnosis of oesophageal varices of any size in paediatric or adult patients with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis, irrespective of aetiology. To investigate the accuracy of these non-invasive tests as triage or replacement of oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy. Secondary objectives To compare the diagnostic accuracy of these same tests for the diagnosis of high-risk oesophageal varices in paediatric or adult patients with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis, irrespective of aetiology.We aimed to perform pair-wise comparisons between the three index tests, while considering predefined cut-off values.We investigated sources of heterogeneity. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies Register, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), and Science Citation Index - Expanded (Web of Science) (14 June 2016). We applied no language or document-type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of platelet count, spleen length, and platelet count-to-spleen length ratio for the diagnosis of oesophageal varices via oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy as the reference standard in children or adults of any age with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis, who did not have variceal bleeding. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Standard Cochrane methods as outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Diagnostic Test of Accuracy Reviews. MAIN RESULTS: We included 71 studies, 67 of which enrolled only adults and four only children. All included studies were cross-sectional and were undertaken at a tertiary care centre. Eight studies reported study results in abstracts or letters. We considered all but one of the included studies to be at high risk of bias. We had major concerns about defining the cut-off value for the three index tests; most included studies derived the best cut-off values a posteriori, thus overestimating accuracy; 16 studies were designed to validate the 909 (n/mm3)/mm cut-off value for platelet count-to-spleen length ratio. Enrolment of participants was not consecutive in six studies and was unclear in 31 studies. Thirty-four studies assessed enrolment consecutively. Eleven studies excluded some included participants from the analyses, and in only one study, the time interval between index tests and the reference standard was longer than three months. Diagnosis of varices of any size. Platelet count showed sensitivity of 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.77) and specificity of 0.80 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.88) (cut-off value of around 150,000/mm3 from 140,000 to 150,000/mm3; 10 studies, 2054 participants). When examining potential sources of heterogeneity, we found that of all predefined factors, only aetiology had a role: studies including participants with chronic hepatitis C reported different results when compared with studies including participants with mixed aetiologies (P = 0.036). Spleen length showed sensitivity of 0.85 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.91) and specificity of 0.54 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.62) (cut-off values of around 110 mm, from 110 to 112.5 mm; 13 studies, 1489 participants). Summary estimates for detection of varices of any size showed sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.97) and specificity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.91) in 17 studies, and 2637 participants had a cut-off value for platelet count-to-spleen length ratio of 909 (n/mm3)/mm. We found no effect of predefined sources of heterogeneity. An overall indirect comparison of the HSROCs of the three index tests showed that platelet count-to-spleen length ratio was the most accurate index test when compared with platelet count (P < 0.001) and spleen length (P < 0.001). Diagnosis of varices at high risk of bleeding. Platelet count showed sensitivity of 0.80 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.85) and specificity of 0.68 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.77) (cut-off value of around 150,000/mm3 from 140,000 to 160,000/mm3; seven studies, 1671 participants). For spleen length, we obtained only a summary ROC curve as we found no common cut-off between studies (six studies, 883 participants). Platelet count-to-spleen length ratio showed sensitivity of 0.85 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.93) and specificity of 0.66 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.77) (cut-off value of around 909 (n/mm3)/mm; from 897 to 921 (n/mm3)/mm; seven studies, 642 participants). An overall indirect comparison of the HSROCs of the three index tests showed that platelet count-to-spleen length ratio was the most accurate index test when compared with platelet count (P = 0.003) and spleen length (P < 0.001). DIagnosis of varices of any size in children. We found four studies including 277 children with different liver diseases and or portal vein thrombosis. Platelet count showed sensitivity of 0.71 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.80) and specificity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.91) (cut-off value of around 115,000/mm3; four studies, 277 participants). Platelet count-to-spleen length z-score ratio showed sensitivity of 0.74 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.81) and specificity of 0.64 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.84) (cut-off value of 25; two studies, 197 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Platelet count-to-spleen length ratio could be used to stratify the risk of oesophageal varices. This test can be used as a triage test before endoscopy, thus ruling out adults without varices. In the case of a ratio > 909 (n/mm3)/mm, the presence of oesophageal varices of any size can be excluded and only 7% of adults with varices of any size would be missed, allowing investigators to spare the number of oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy examinations. This test is not accurate enough for identification of oesophageal varices at high risk of bleeding that require primary prophylaxis. Future studies should assess the diagnostic accuracy of this test in specific subgroups of patients, as well as its ability to predict variceal bleeding. New non-invasive tests should be examined.

Paediatric physician-researchers: coping with tensions in dual accountability.

Potential conflicts between the roles of physicians and researchers have been described at the theoretical level in the bioethics literature (Czoli, et al., 2011). Physicians and researchers are generally in mutually distinct roles, responsible for patients and participants respectively. With increasing emphasis on integration of research into clinical settings, however, the role divide is sometimes unclear. Consequently, physician-researchers must consider and negotiate salient ethical differences between clinical- and research-based obligations (Miller et al, 1998). This paper explores the subjective experiences and perspectives of 30 physician-researchers working in three Canadian paediatric settings. Drawing on qualitative interviews, it identifies ethical challenges and strategies used by physician-researchers in managing dual roles. It considers whether competing obligations could have both positive and adverse consequences for both physician-researchers and patients. Finally, we discuss how empirical work, which explores the perspectives of those engaged in research and clinical practice, can lead the way to understanding and promoting best practice.

Accountability and pediatric physician-researchers: are theoretical models compatible with Canadian lived experience?

Physician-researchers are bound by professional obligations stemming from both the role of the physician and the role of the researcher. Currently, the dominant models for understanding the relationship between physician-researchers' clinical duties and research duties fit into three categories: the similarity position, the difference position and the middle ground. The law may be said to offer a fourth "model" that is independent from these three categories.These models frame the expectations placed upon physician-researchers by colleagues, regulators, patients and research participants. This paper examines the extent to which the data from semi-structured interviews with 30 physician-researchers at three major pediatric hospitals in Canada reflect these traditional models. It seeks to determine the extent to which existing models align with the described lived experience of the pediatric physician-researchers interviewed.Ultimately, we find that although some physician-researchers make references to something like the weak version of the similarity position, the pediatric-researchers interviewed in this study did not describe their dual roles in a way that tightly mirrors any of the existing theoretical frameworks. We thus conclude that either physician-researchers are in need of better training regarding the nature of the accountability relationships that flow from their dual roles or that models setting out these roles and relationships must be altered to better reflect what we can reasonably expect of physician-researchers in a real-world environment.