Giovanni Di Leo1, Erica Fisci2, Francesco Secchi3,4, Marco Alì4, Federico Ambrogi5, Luca Maria Sconfienza3,6, Francesco Sardanelli3,6. 1. Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy. gianni.dileo77@gmail.com. 2. Scuola di Specializzazione in Radiodiagnostica, Università degli Studi di Genova, Via G.B. Alberti 4, 16132, Genova, Italy. 3. Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy. 4. PhD Course in Integrative Biomedical Research, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy. 5. Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Vanzetti 5, 20133, Milan, Italy. 6. Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To review the diagnostic performance of MR coronary angiography (MRCA) for coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched on MEDLINE/EMBASE with the following inclusion criteria: 01/01/2000-03/23/2015 publication date; per-patient sensitivity/specificity for >50 % stenosis confirmed by conventional coronary angiography with raw data provided or retrievable; sample size >10. Quality was appraised using QUADAS2. RESULTS: Nine hundred eighteen studies were retrieved, 24 of them, including 1,638 patients, were selected. Using a bivariate model, the pooled sensitivity was 89 % (95 % confidence interval 86-92 %), the pooled specificity 72 % (63-79 %). Meta-regression did not show a significant impact on sensitivity/specificity for both year of publication and disease prevalence (p ≥ 0.114). Sensitivity of contrast-enhanced examinations (95 %, 90-97 %) was higher (p = 0.005) than that of unenhanced examinations (87 %, 83-90 %). Specificity of whole-heart acquisition mode (78 %, 72-84 %) was higher (p = 0.006) than that of targeted mode (57 %, 45-69 %). Specificity at 3 T (83 %, 69-92 %) was higher (p = 0.067) than that at 1.5 T (68 %, 60-76 %). Risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability were low. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity and specificity of MRCA for CAD were 89 % and 72 %, respectively. A specificity higher than 80 % may be obtained at 3 T. Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols should be preferred for a higher diagnostic performance. KEY POINTS: • MRCA sensitivity and specificity for CAD are below those of CTA. • Contrast administration increased sensitivity to 95 % (90-97 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Whole-heart mode increased specificity to 78 % (72-84 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Specificity at 3 T was borderline-significantly higher (p = 0.067) than at 1.5 T. • Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols are the best approach for MRCA.
OBJECTIVES: To review the diagnostic performance of MR coronary angiography (MRCA) for coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched on MEDLINE/EMBASE with the following inclusion criteria: 01/01/2000-03/23/2015 publication date; per-patient sensitivity/specificity for >50 % stenosis confirmed by conventional coronary angiography with raw data provided or retrievable; sample size >10. Quality was appraised using QUADAS2. RESULTS: Nine hundred eighteen studies were retrieved, 24 of them, including 1,638 patients, were selected. Using a bivariate model, the pooled sensitivity was 89 % (95 % confidence interval 86-92 %), the pooled specificity 72 % (63-79 %). Meta-regression did not show a significant impact on sensitivity/specificity for both year of publication and disease prevalence (p ≥ 0.114). Sensitivity of contrast-enhanced examinations (95 %, 90-97 %) was higher (p = 0.005) than that of unenhanced examinations (87 %, 83-90 %). Specificity of whole-heart acquisition mode (78 %, 72-84 %) was higher (p = 0.006) than that of targeted mode (57 %, 45-69 %). Specificity at 3 T (83 %, 69-92 %) was higher (p = 0.067) than that at 1.5 T (68 %, 60-76 %). Risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability were low. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity and specificity of MRCA for CAD were 89 % and 72 %, respectively. A specificity higher than 80 % may be obtained at 3 T. Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols should be preferred for a higher diagnostic performance. KEY POINTS: • MRCA sensitivity and specificity for CAD are below those of CTA. • Contrast administration increased sensitivity to 95 % (90-97 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Whole-heart mode increased specificity to 78 % (72-84 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Specificity at 3 T was borderline-significantly higher (p = 0.067) than at 1.5 T. • Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols are the best approach for MRCA.
Authors: W Y Kim; P G Danias; M Stuber; S D Flamm; S Plein; E Nagel; S E Langerak; O M Weber; E M Pedersen; M Schmidt; R M Botnar; W J Manning Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-12-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J M Lieberman; R J Alfidi; A D Nelson; R E Botti; T W Moir; J R Haaga; S Kopiwoda; F D Miraldi; A M Cohen; H E Butler Journal: Radiology Date: 1984-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Christoph Langer; Andreas Peterschröder; Krista Franzke; Hermann Esdorn; Hermann Körperich; Hans Meyer; Dieter Horstkotte; Marcus Wiemer Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2009 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: John F Heitner; Igor Klem; Derek Rasheed; Abhinav Chandra; Han W Kim; Lowie M R Van Assche; Michele Parker; Robert M Judd; James G Jollis; Raymond J Kim Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: A E J Ikonen; H I Manninen; P Vainio; T P J Hirvonen; R L Vanninen; P J Matsi; S Soimakallio; J E K Hartikainen Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 1.701
Authors: Felix C Sokolowski; Philipp Karius; Alejandra Rodríguez; Alexander Lembcke; Moritz Wagner; Bernd Hamm; Marc Dewey Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Aryan Zahergivar; Madison Kocher; Jeffrey Waltz; Ismail Kabakus; Jordan Chamberlin; Selcuk Akkaya; Ali M Agha; U Joseph Schoepf; Jeremy R Burt Journal: Heliyon Date: 2021-03-18