skip to page content
Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Use of Fecal Occult Blood Testing as a Diagnostic Tool for Clinical Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Lee MW, Pourmorady JS, Laine L. Use of Fecal Occult Blood Testing as a Diagnostic Tool for Clinical Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The American journal of gastroenterology. 2020 May 1; 115(5):662-670.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions


INTRODUCTION: Fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) are validated only for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but are commonly used as a diagnostic test in other clinical settings. We performed a systematic review to assess performance characteristics of FOBT as a diagnostic test for clinical indications. METHODS: Bibliographic databases were searched to identify studies in adult patients with a specific gastrointestinal symptom or condition who underwent FOBT and a reference test and provided data on diagnoses. Our primary end point was sensitivity. Risk of bias was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria: 12 in iron deficiency anemia (IDA) (5 fecal immunochemical (FIT) and 7 guaiac based), 8 in ulcerative colitis (FIT), and 2 in acute diarrhea (guaiac based). Only 2 studies had low risk of bias on all domains of the QUADAS-2. On meta-analysis, FOBT had a sensitivity of 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.63) and a specificity of 0.84 (95% CI 0.75-0.89) in predicting presumptive causes of IDA at endoscopy, with comparable results for guaiac-based tests and FIT. Sensitivity was higher for CRC (0.83) than non-CRC lesions (0.54). FIT had a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI 0.57-0.84) and a specificity of 0.80 (95% CI 0.67-0.89) in predicting endoscopic activity in UC. Sensitivities of FOBT for positive stool culture in acute diarrhea were 0.38 and 0.87. DISCUSSION: Sensitivity of FOBT is poor for IDA: 42% of patients with identifiable causes of IDA had false-negative FOBT. Our results did not show acceptable performance characteristics for FOBT to guide decisions regarding endoscopic evaluation and do not support its use in IDA.

Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.