Literature DB >> 31303392

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for detecting hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease between cardiac magnetic resonance and nuclear medical imaging: A meta-analysis.

Kai Yang1, Shi-Qin Yu1, Min-Jie Lu2, Shi-Hua Zhao3.   

Abstract

AIMS: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of stress myocardial perfusion imaging between cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and nuclear medical imaging, including single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET), for the diagnosis of hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) with fractional flow reserve (FFR) as the reference standard. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We searched PubMed and Embase for all published studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of stress myocardial perfusion imaging modalities, including CMR, SPECT, and PET, to diagnose hemodynamically significant CAD with FFR as the reference standard. A total of 28 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis: 14 CMR, 13 SPECT, and 5 PET articles. The results demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-0.93), 0.69 (95% CI: 0.56-0.79), and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.70-0.91), and a pooled specificity of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93), 0.85 (95% CI, 0.80-0.89), and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86-0.91) for CMR, SPECT, and PET, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of CMR, PET, and SPECT was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.96), 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89-0.94), and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83-0.89), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: CMR and PET both have high accuracy and SPECT has moderate accuracy to detect hemodynamically significant CAD with FFR as the reference standard. Furthermore, the diagnostic accuracy of CMR at 3.0 T is superior to 1.5 T.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diagnostic accuracy; Fractional flow reserve; Meta-analysis; Myocardial perfusion imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31303392     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.06.054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  2 in total

1.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Waqas Ullah; Sohaib Roomi; Hafez M Abdullah; Maryam Mukhtar; Zain Ali; Ping Ye; Donald C Haas; Vincent M Figueredo
Journal:  Cardiol Res       Date:  2020-05-03

2.  Long-term prognostic value of vasodilator stress cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Karl J Weiss; Sarah B Nasser; Tamar Bigvava; Adelina Doltra; Bernhard Schnackenburg; Alexander Berger; Markus S Anker; Christian Stehning; Patrick Doeblin; Mohamed Abdelmeguid; Mohamed Talat; Rolf Gebker; Wael E-Naggar; Burkert Pieske; Sebastian Kelle
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2021-12-06
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.