Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in Newborns

Background: Newborns with a critical congenital heart disease left undiagnosed and untreated have a substantial risk for serious complications and subsequent failure to thrive. Prenatal ultrasound screening is not widely available, nor is postnatal echocardiography. Physical examination is the stand...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jari T. van Vliet, Naizihijwa G. Majani, Pilly Chillo, Martijn G. Slieker
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2023-12-01
Series:Children
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/11/1/47
_version_ 1797344351102173184
author Jari T. van Vliet
Naizihijwa G. Majani
Pilly Chillo
Martijn G. Slieker
author_facet Jari T. van Vliet
Naizihijwa G. Majani
Pilly Chillo
Martijn G. Slieker
author_sort Jari T. van Vliet
collection DOAJ
description Background: Newborns with a critical congenital heart disease left undiagnosed and untreated have a substantial risk for serious complications and subsequent failure to thrive. Prenatal ultrasound screening is not widely available, nor is postnatal echocardiography. Physical examination is the standard for postnatal screening. Pulse oximetry has been proposed in numerous studies as an alternative screening method. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the diagnostic accuracies of both screening methods separately and combined. Methods: A systematic literature search of the Embase, PubMed, and Global Health databases up to 30 November 2023 was conducted with the following keywords: critical congenital heart disease, physical examination, clinical scores, pulse oximetry, and echocardiography. The search included all studies conducted in the newborn period using both physical examination and pulse oximetry as screening methods and excluded newborns admitted to the intensive care unit. All studies were assessed for risk of bias and applicability concerns using the QUADAS-2 score. The review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 statement guideline. Results: Out of 2711 articles, 20 articles were selected as eligible for meta-analysis. Cumulatively, the sample included 872,549 screened newborns. The pooled sensitivity of the physical examination screening method was found to be 0.69 (0.66–0.73 (95% CI)) and specificity was found to be 0.98 (0.98–0.98). For the pulse oximetry screening method, the pooled sensitivity and specificity yielded 0.78 (0.75–0.82) and 0.99 (0.99–0.99), respectively. The combined method of screening yielded improved diagnostic characteristics at a sensitivity and specificity of 0.93 (0.91–0.95) and 0.98 (0.98–0.98, respectively. Conclusions: The evidence indicates that combining both physical examination and pulse oximetry to screen for critical congenital heart disease exceeds the accuracy of either separate method. The main limitation is that solely newborns with suspected critical congenital heart disease were subjected to the reference standard. We recommend adapting both methods to screen for critical congenital heart diseases, especially in settings lacking standard fetal ultrasound screening. To increase the sensitivity further, we recommend increasing the screening time window and employing the peripheral perfusion index.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T11:02:05Z
format Article
id doaj.art-51ecbb3f78ef445c9a654592c4108cce
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2227-9067
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T11:02:05Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Children
spelling doaj.art-51ecbb3f78ef445c9a654592c4108cce2024-01-26T15:46:54ZengMDPI AGChildren2227-90672023-12-011114710.3390/children11010047Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in NewbornsJari T. van Vliet0Naizihijwa G. Majani1Pilly Chillo2Martijn G. Slieker3Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Wilhelmina Childrens Hospital, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The NetherlandsDepartment of Pediatric Cardiology, Wilhelmina Childrens Hospital, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The NetherlandsDepartment of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Faculty of Adult Cardiology, Muhimbili Campus, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam 65001, TanzaniaDepartment of Pediatric Cardiology, Wilhelmina Childrens Hospital, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The NetherlandsBackground: Newborns with a critical congenital heart disease left undiagnosed and untreated have a substantial risk for serious complications and subsequent failure to thrive. Prenatal ultrasound screening is not widely available, nor is postnatal echocardiography. Physical examination is the standard for postnatal screening. Pulse oximetry has been proposed in numerous studies as an alternative screening method. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the diagnostic accuracies of both screening methods separately and combined. Methods: A systematic literature search of the Embase, PubMed, and Global Health databases up to 30 November 2023 was conducted with the following keywords: critical congenital heart disease, physical examination, clinical scores, pulse oximetry, and echocardiography. The search included all studies conducted in the newborn period using both physical examination and pulse oximetry as screening methods and excluded newborns admitted to the intensive care unit. All studies were assessed for risk of bias and applicability concerns using the QUADAS-2 score. The review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 statement guideline. Results: Out of 2711 articles, 20 articles were selected as eligible for meta-analysis. Cumulatively, the sample included 872,549 screened newborns. The pooled sensitivity of the physical examination screening method was found to be 0.69 (0.66–0.73 (95% CI)) and specificity was found to be 0.98 (0.98–0.98). For the pulse oximetry screening method, the pooled sensitivity and specificity yielded 0.78 (0.75–0.82) and 0.99 (0.99–0.99), respectively. The combined method of screening yielded improved diagnostic characteristics at a sensitivity and specificity of 0.93 (0.91–0.95) and 0.98 (0.98–0.98, respectively. Conclusions: The evidence indicates that combining both physical examination and pulse oximetry to screen for critical congenital heart disease exceeds the accuracy of either separate method. The main limitation is that solely newborns with suspected critical congenital heart disease were subjected to the reference standard. We recommend adapting both methods to screen for critical congenital heart diseases, especially in settings lacking standard fetal ultrasound screening. To increase the sensitivity further, we recommend increasing the screening time window and employing the peripheral perfusion index.https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/11/1/47newborn screeningcritical congenital heart diseasepulse oximetry
spellingShingle Jari T. van Vliet
Naizihijwa G. Majani
Pilly Chillo
Martijn G. Slieker
Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in Newborns
Children
newborn screening
critical congenital heart disease
pulse oximetry
title Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in Newborns
title_full Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in Newborns
title_fullStr Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in Newborns
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in Newborns
title_short Diagnostic Accuracy of Physical Examination and Pulse Oximetry for Critical Congenital Cardiac Disease Screening in Newborns
title_sort diagnostic accuracy of physical examination and pulse oximetry for critical congenital cardiac disease screening in newborns
topic newborn screening
critical congenital heart disease
pulse oximetry
url https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/11/1/47
work_keys_str_mv AT jaritvanvliet diagnosticaccuracyofphysicalexaminationandpulseoximetryforcriticalcongenitalcardiacdiseasescreeninginnewborns
AT naizihijwagmajani diagnosticaccuracyofphysicalexaminationandpulseoximetryforcriticalcongenitalcardiacdiseasescreeninginnewborns
AT pillychillo diagnosticaccuracyofphysicalexaminationandpulseoximetryforcriticalcongenitalcardiacdiseasescreeninginnewborns
AT martijngslieker diagnosticaccuracyofphysicalexaminationandpulseoximetryforcriticalcongenitalcardiacdiseasescreeninginnewborns