Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of results of the studies included in this meta-analysis

From: Value of variation of end-tidal carbon dioxide for predicting fluid responsiveness during the passive leg raising test in patients with mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

First author/Year of publication Sample size Cutoff value (increase in percentage or absolute value) Subject numbers could be calculated Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) AUROC (95%CI)
TP FP FN TN
Monge/2012 [18] 37 5% 19 1 2 19 90.5 93.7 0.94 (0.82–0.99)
Monnet/2013 [17] 40 5% 15 0 6 15 71 100 0.93 (0.81–0.99)
Zang/2013 [30] 42 5% 21 2 3 21 88 88.2 0.90 (0.775–1.0)
Wang/2015 [31] 48 5% 26 1 8 26 75.8 93.4 0.849 (0.739–0.93)
Toupin/2016 [32] 90 2 mmHg 21 19 7 21 75 70 0.80 (0.70–0.90)
Yao/2016 [33] 41 5.8% 16 2 5 16 76.2 90 0.875 (0.769–0.981)
  1. AUROC, Area under the receiver operator characteristics curve; CI, confidence interval; FN, false negative; FP, false positive; NA, not available; TN, true negative; TP, true positive