Fig 1.
Flow diagram of the literature search.
Table 1.
Main characteristics of the papers included in the meta-analysis.
Fig 2.
Sensitivity (%) of different serology tests for the diagnosis of untreated hepatic CE cysts according to cyst stage.
“CE3 all” = data from CE3a + CE3b + CE3 not divided into CE3a and CE3b. “CE inactive” = data from CE4 + CE5 + CE4 and CE5 not divided into CE4 and CE5. LQS = Low Quality Studies. Data from papers referring to the field or to the hospital/lab setting were included. In case more than one assay per type was investigated in the same paper (e.g. more than one ELISA test), the one with the best sensitivity was used for the meta-analysis. Error bars represent 95% CI.
Table 2.
Estimated sensitivity (Se %) with 95%CI of ELISA test with best performance.
Fig 3.
Sensitivity (%) of ELISA tests for the diagnosis of untreated hepatic CE cysts according to cyst stage and setting (field vs lab and/or hospital).
“CE3 all” = data from CE3a + CE3b + CE3 not divided into CE3a and CE3b. “CE inactive” = data from CE4 + CE5 + CE4 and CE5 not divided into CE4 and CE5. LQS = Low Quality Studies. In case more than one assay per type was investigated in the same paper (e.g. more than one ELISA test), the one with the best sensitivity was used for the meta-analysis. Error bars represent 95% CI.
Fig 4.
Sensitivity (%) of ELISA tests for the diagnosis of hepatic CE cysts, irrespective of previous treatment and setting.
“CE3 all” = data from CE3a + CE3b + CE3 not divided into CE3a and CE3b. “CE inactive” = data from CE4 + CE5 + CE4 and CE5 not divided into CE4 and CE5. LQS = Low Quality Studies. In case more than one assay per type was investigated in the same paper (e.g. more than one ELISA test), the one with the best sensitivity was used for the meta-analysis. Error bars represent 95% CI.
Fig 5.
Sensitivity (%) of different assays using a variety of antigenic preparations, as reported by three example recent studies, showing the same pattern according to cyst stage.