Yong Joong Kim1, Sejin Ha2, Yong-Il Kim3. 1. Department of Family Medicine, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. kyi821209@naver.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent progress in amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) has enabled the targeted imaging of cardiac amyloidosis with accuracy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic performance of cardiac amyloidosis using amyloid PET. METHODS: A systematic search was performed using key words: cardiac amyloidosis, amyloid, and PET. We estimated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Furthermore, the semiquantitative parameters of PET were evaluated to diagnose cardiac amyloidosis and discern its type [systemic light chain amyloidosis (AL) vs transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR)] using the pooled standardized mean difference (SMD). RESULTS: In total, six eligible studies with a total of 98 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity was 0.95, the specificity was 0.98, positive LR was 10.130, negative LR was 0.1, and DOR was 148.83. The semiquantitative parameters of amyloid PET showed significantly higher values for cardiac amyloidosis patients than those for controls (pooled SMD = 1.42; P < .001), and in AL than ATTR (pooled SMD = 0.96; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Amyloid PET imaging can be a useful method for diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis. The semiquantitative parameters of amyloid PET can help diagnose cardiac amyloidosis and discern its type.
BACKGROUND: Recent progress in amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) has enabled the targeted imaging of cardiac amyloidosis with accuracy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic performance of cardiac amyloidosis using amyloid PET. METHODS: A systematic search was performed using key words: cardiac amyloidosis, amyloid, and PET. We estimated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Furthermore, the semiquantitative parameters of PET were evaluated to diagnose cardiac amyloidosis and discern its type [systemic light chain amyloidosis (AL) vs transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR)] using the pooled standardized mean difference (SMD). RESULTS: In total, six eligible studies with a total of 98 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity was 0.95, the specificity was 0.98, positive LR was 10.130, negative LR was 0.1, and DOR was 148.83. The semiquantitative parameters of amyloid PET showed significantly higher values for cardiac amyloidosispatients than those for controls (pooled SMD = 1.42; P < .001), and in AL than ATTR (pooled SMD = 0.96; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Amyloid PET imaging can be a useful method for diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis. The semiquantitative parameters of amyloid PET can help diagnose cardiac amyloidosis and discern its type.
Authors: Gunnar Antoni; Mark Lubberink; Sergio Estrada; Jan Axelsson; Kristina Carlson; Lars Lindsjö; Tanja Kero; Bengt Långström; Sven-Olof Granstam; Sara Rosengren; Ola Vedin; Cecilia Wassberg; Gerhard Wikström; Per Westermark; Jens Sörensen Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Riemer H J A Slart; Andor W J M Glaudemans; Walter Noordzij; Johan Bijzet; Bouke P C Hazenberg; Hans L A Nienhuis Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-04-23 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: M F Santarelli; D Genovesi; M Scipioni; V Positano; B Favilli; A Giorgetti; G Vergaro; L Landini; M Emdin; P Marzullo Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2021-04-16 Impact factor: 3.872
Authors: Weijia Li; Dipan Uppal; Yu-Chiang Wang; Xiaobo Xu; Damianos G Kokkinidis; Mark I Travin; James M Tauras Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-05-30
Authors: Teodor M Ionescu; Wael Jalloul; Cati R Stolniceanu; Roxana Iacob; Laura P Grecu; Ana-Maria Stătescu; Irena Grierosu; Mihai Guțu; Adrian Gavrilescu; Crișu Daniela; Antoniu Petriș; Manuela Ciocoiu; Cristina Ungureanu; Cipriana Ștefănescu Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2021-07-17 Impact factor: 2.668