Literature DB >> 34274269

Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for Cardiac Transplant Rejection: A Meta-Analysis.

Donghee Han1, Robert J H Miller2, Yuka Otaki1, Heidi Gransar1, Evan Kransdorf3, Michelle Hamilton3, Michele Kittelson3, Jignesh Patel3, Jon A Kobashigawa3, Louise Thomson1, Daniel Berman1, Balaji Tamarappoo4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the diagnostic performance of various CMR imaging parameters for evaluating acute cardiac transplant rejection.
BACKGROUND: Endomyocardial biopsy is the current gold standard for detection of acute cardiac transplant rejection. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is uniquely capable of myocardial tissue characterization and may be useful as a noninvasive alternative for the diagnosis of graft rejection.
METHODS: PubMed and Web of Science were searched for relevant publications reporting on the use of CMR myocardial tissue characterization for detection of acute cardiac transplant rejection with endomyocardial biopsy as the reference standard. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and hierarchical modeling-based summary receiver-operating characteristic curves were calculated.
RESULTS: Of 478 papers, 10 studies comprising 564 patients were included. The sensitivity and specificity for the detection of acute cardiac transplant rejection were 84.6 (95% CI: 65.6-94.0) and 70.1 (95% CI: 54.2-82.2) for T1, 86.5 (95% CI: 72.1-94.1) and 85.9 (95% CI: 65.2-94.6) for T2, 91.3 (95% CI: 63.9-98.4) and 67.6 (95% CI: 56.1-77.4) for extracellular volume fraction (ECV), and 50.1 (95% CI: 31.2-68.9) and 60.2 (95% CI: 36.7-79.7) for late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). The areas under the hierarchical modeling-based summary receiver-operating characteristic curve were 0.84 (95% CI: 0.81-0.87) for T1, 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89-94) for T2, 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74-0.81) for ECV, and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.51-0.60) for LGE. T2 values demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy, followed by native T1, ECV, and LGE (all P values <0.001 for T1, ECV, and LGE vs T2).
CONCLUSIONS: T2 mapping demonstrated higher diagnostic accuracy than other CMR techniques. Native T1 and ECV provide high diagnostic use but lower diagnostic accuracy compared with T2, which was related primarily to lower specificity. LGE showed poor diagnostic performance for detection of rejection.
Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CMR; cardiac transplant; meta-analysis; transplant rejection

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34274269     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2021.05.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1876-7591


  5 in total

1.  Deep learning: Opening a third eye to myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Tomoe Hagio; Venkatesh L Murthy
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  2022 Artificial intelligence primer for the nuclear cardiologist.

Authors:  Manish Motwani
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 3.872

Review 3.  Cardiac Allograft Injuries: A Review of Approaches to a Common Dilemma, With Emphasis on Emerging Techniques.

Authors:  Christopher Hayward
Journal:  Int J Heart Fail       Date:  2022-04-06

Review 4.  Artificial intelligence for disease diagnosis and risk prediction in nuclear cardiology.

Authors:  Robert J H Miller; Cathleen Huang; Joanna X Liang; Piotr J Slomka
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 3.872

5.  The Bright Side of Myocardial Edema.

Authors:  Daniel E Clark; Sean G Hughes
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 5.501

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.