2015The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & MetabolismRequires access

ACTH Stimulation Tests for the Diagnosis of Adrenal Insufficiency: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Naykky Singh Ospina, Alaa Al Nofal, Irina Bancos, Asma Javed, Khalid Benkhadra, Ekta Kapoor, Aida Nadim Lteif, Neena Natt, Mohammad Hassan Murad

Open publisher page 247 citations

Abstract

CONTEXT: The diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency is clinically challenging and often requires ACTH stimulation tests. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the high- (250 mcg) and low- (1 mcg) dose ACTH stimulation tests in the diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency. METHODS: We searched six databases through February 2014. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and appraised the risk of bias. Diagnostic association measures were pooled across studies using a bivariate model. DATA SYNTHESIS: For secondary adrenal insufficiency, we included 30 studies enrolling 1209 adults and 228 children. High- and low-dose ACTH stimulation tests had similar diagnostic accuracy in adults and children using different peak serum cortisol cutoffs. In general, both tests had low sensitivity and high specificity resulting in reasonable likelihood ratios for a positive test (adults: high dose, 9.1; low dose, 5.9; children: high dose, 43.5; low dose, 7.7), but a fairly suboptimal likelihood ratio for a negative test (adults: high dose, 0.39; low dose, 0.19; children: high dose, 0.65; low dose, 0.34). For primary adrenal insufficiency, we included five studies enrolling 100 patients. Data were only available to estimate the sensitivity of high dose ACTH stimulation test (92%; 95% confidence interval, 81-97%). CONCLUSION: Both high- and low-dose ACTH stimulation tests had similar diagnostic accuracy. Both tests are adequate to rule in, but not rule out, secondary adrenal insufficiency. Our confidence in these estimates is low to moderate because of the likely risk of bias, heterogeneity, and imprecision.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

CONTEXT: The diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency is clinically challenging and often requires ACTH stimulation tests. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the high- (250 mcg) and low- (1 mcg) dose ACTH stimulation tests in the diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency. METHODS: We searched six databases through February 2014. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and appraised the risk of bias. Diagnostic association measures were pooled across studies using a bivariate model. DATA SYNTHESIS: For secondary adrenal insufficiency, we included 30 studies enrolling 1209 adults and 228 children. High- and low-dose ACTH stimulation tests had similar diagnostic accuracy in adults and children using different peak serum cortisol cutoffs. In general, both tests had low sensitivity and high specificity resulting in reasonable likelihood ratios for a positive test (adults: high dose, 9.1; low dose, 5.9; children: high dose, 43.5; low dose, 7.7), but a fairly suboptimal likelihood ratio for a negative test (adults: high dose, 0.39; low dose, 0.19; children: high dose, 0.65; low dose, 0.34). For primary adrenal insufficiency, we included five studies enrolling 100 patients. Data were only available to estimate the sensitivity of high dose ACTH stimulation test (92%; 95% confidence interval, 81-97%). CONCLUSION: Both high- and low-dose ACTH stimulation tests had similar diagnostic accuracy. Both tests are adequate to rule in, but not rule out, secondary adrenal insufficiency. Our confidence in these estimates is low to moderate because of the likely risk of bias, heterogeneity, and imprecision.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 247 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

CONTEXT: The diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency is clinically challenging and often requires ACTH stimulation tests. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the high- (250 mcg) and low- (1 mcg) dose ACTH stimulation tests in the diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency. METHODS: We searched six databases through February 2014. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and appraised the risk of bias. Diagnostic association measures were pooled across studies using a bivariate model. DATA SYNTHESIS: For secondary adrenal insufficiency, we included 30 studies enrolling 1209 adults and 228 children. High- and low-dose ACTH stimulation tests had similar diagnostic accuracy in adults and children using different peak serum cortisol cutoffs. In general, both tests had low sensitivity and high specificity resulting in reasonable likelihood ratios for a positive test (adults: high dose, 9.1; low dose, 5.9; children: high dose, 43.5; low dose, 7.7), but a fairly suboptimal likelihood ratio for a negative test (adults: high dose, 0.39; low dose, 0.19; children: high dose, 0.65; low dose, 0.34). For primary adrenal insufficiency, we included five studies enrolling 100 patients. Data were only available to estimate the sensitivity of high dose ACTH stimulation test (92%; 95% confidence interval, 81-97%). CONCLUSION: Both high- and low-dose ACTH stimulation tests had similar diagnostic accuracy. Both tests are adequate to rule in, but not rule out, secondary adrenal insufficiency. Our confidence in these estimates is low to moderate because of the likely risk of bias, heterogeneity, and imprecision.

Key concepts: Adrenal insufficiency, Medicine, ACTH stimulation test, Primary Adrenal Insufficiency, Meta-analysis, Confidence interval, Stimulation, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
ACTH Stimulation Tests for the Diagnosis of Adrenal Insufficiency: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Research Paper | ScholarLens