Evidence Hub

Creatine kinase test diagnostic accuracy in neonatal screening for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: a systematic review

Kelli Carneiro de Freitas Nakata, Priscilla Perez da Silva Pereira, Bruno Salgado Riveros

Clinical Biochemistry, 2021

22 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

to evaluate the accuracy of the creatine kinase test in neonatal screening for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.

METHODS

Investigations were carried out in six databases, gray literature and manual search. All studies and data extraction eligibility processes were carried out in paired mode. The methodological stringency of the studies was assessed using the modified QUADAS 2 tool. The performance measures of the test were calculated using the Meta-DiSc software, version 1.4.

RESULTS

11 studies were included, with a total sample of 1,416,123 newborns. The positive likelihood ratio was more than 10 in these studies. On the other hand, the negative likelihood ratio was up to 0.2 in 9/10 studies; however, when considering the upper limit of the confidence interval, only 4/10 studies showed a negative likelihood ratio less than 0.2 and in 6/11 it was greater than 0.5. Specificity was close to 1 in studies. The sensitivity was equal to or greater than 0.81 in 10/11 studies; however, when considering the reliability's minimum interval limit, only 6/10 studies showed sensitivity equal to or greater than 0.7. Ten studies were summarized on a ROC curve indicating good performance (Area under the curve = 0.9980 and Q index = 0.9846).

CONCLUSIONS

the creatine kinase test showed good accuracy in screening for cases of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and may be a useful alternative in the early diagnosis of the disease followed by confirmatory genetic testing.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free