This systematic review aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of thoracic ultrasound in malignant pleural effusion.Articles published until December 2019 in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were screened by two authors independently to extract data and evaluate the risks of bias and applicability using the modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. We described the forest plots of each thoracic ultrasound finding. We estimated the pooled sensitivity and specificity of pleural nodularity using the bivariate random-effects model.We included seven articles and found that each thoracic ultrasound finding had low sensitivity. The pooled specificity of pleural nodularity was 96.9% (95% CI 93.2%–98.6%).In conclusion, thoracic ultrasound is not useful in ruling out malignant pleural effusion. Physicians can proceed rigorously to repeat thoracentesis or other invasive procedures when pleural nodularity is detected.

Rationale: Chest computed tomography is performed in patients with empyema for various reasons. However, its predictive ability for patient outcomes in empyema has not been evaluated. Objectives: To evaluate the predictive ability of computed tomography findings (pleural thickness, loculation, interlobar pleural effusion, lung abscess, and bronchopleural fistula) for 90-day mortality in empyema. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted across six acute care hospitals in Japan. We included patients with confirmed empyema diagnoses who underwent chest computed tomography within 7 days of diagnosis. Imaging findings were defined as pleural thickness, loculation, interlobar pleural effusion, lung abscess, or bronchopleural fistula. One radiologist interpreted the computed tomography scans without patient information. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. We calculated the differences in 90-day mortality between the presence and absence of each computed tomography finding using logistic regression with or without adjustment for early thoracic surgery. Results: A total of 711 patients were included in our study. Thoracic surgery was performed in 27% of patients, and the 90-day mortality rate was 10%. The differences (95% confidence intervals) in 90-day mortality without and with adjustment for early thoracic surgery were as follows: pleural thickness, 3.09% (−1.35% to 7.54%) and 2.70% (−1.80% to 7.20%); loculation, −4.01% (−8.61% to 0.60%) and −3.80% (−8.41% to 0.81%); interlobar pleural effusion, −9.15% (−14.58% to −3.72%) and −8.96% (−14.39% to −3.53%); lung abscess, 7.04% (−1.16% to 15.2%) and 6.86% (−1.34% to 15.05%); and bronchopleural fistula, 13.80% (7.66% to 19.94%) and 13.63% (7.50% to 19.77%), respectively. Conclusions: Although interlobar pleural effusion predicted lower 90-day mortality regardless of early thoracic surgery, the presence of bronchopleural fistula predicted higher 90-day mortality with empyema. Our results warrant further validation.

Background: The sensitivity and specificity of anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antibodies have not been systematically analyzed. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anti-GBM antibodies for anti-GBM disease. Summary: Potential studies were searched using MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform based on the index test and target condition. The inclusion criteria were prospective or retrospective cohort studies or case-control studies assessing the sensitivity and specificity of anti-GBM antibodies, and the reference standard was clinical diagnosis including biopsy results. The exclusion criteria were review articles, case reports, animal studies, and in vitro studies. Quality assessment was conducted based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. The overall quality was evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Six studies (1,691 patients) and 11 index tests were included in our systematic review. A high risk of bias and concerns regarding the applicability of patient selection were noted because of the case-control design in 67% of the included studies. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93% (95% CI: 84–97%) and 97% (95% CI: 94–99%), respectively. The certainty of evidence was low because of the high risk of bias and indirectness. Key Messages: Anti-GBM antibodies may exhibit high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of anti-GBM disease. Further cohort studies are needed to confirm their precise diagnostic accuracy and compare diagnostic accuracies among different immunoassays.

Meta‐analyses examining dichotomous outcomes often include single‐zero studies, where no events occur in intervention or control groups. These pose challenges, and several methods have been proposed to address them. A fixed continuity correction method has been shown to bias estimates, but it is frequently used because sometimes software (e.g., RevMan software in Cochrane reviews) uses it as a default. We aimed to empirically compare results using the continuity correction with those using alternative models that do not require correction. To this aim, we reanalyzed the original data from 885 meta‐analyses in Cochrane reviews using the following methods: (i) Mantel–Haenszel model with a fixed continuity correction, (ii) random effects inverse variance model with a fixed continuity correction, (iii) Peto method (the three models available in RevMan), (iv) random effects inverse variance model with the treatment arm continuity correction, (v) Mantel–Haenszel model without correction, (vi) logistic regression, and (vii) a Bayesian random effects model with binominal likelihood. For each meta‐analysis we calculated ratios of odds ratios between all methods, to assess how the choice of method may impact results. Ratios of odds ratios <0.8 or <1.25 were seen in ~30% of the existing meta‐analyses when comparing results between Mantel–Haenszel model with a fixed continuity correction and either Mantel–Haenszel model without correction or logistic regression. We concluded that injudicious use of the fixed continuity correction in existing Cochrane reviews may have substantially influenced effect estimates in some cases. Future updates of RevMan should incorporate less biased statistical methods.