Scholarlink

<p>Conventional coronary angiography (CCA) is the gold standard for diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). It is an invasive test and carries risks. Reduced coronary flow is linked to increased mortality; thus, aggressively measuring coronary flow is important. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is an emerging non-invasive test which can assess ventricular function, myocardial perfusion, and detecting anomalies. We aimed to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of CMR compared to CCA through an umbrella meta-analysis. We searched PubMed articles comparing diagnostic accuracy of CMR with CCA in patients having CAD published from 2000 to 2022 according to PRISMA guidelines. RevMan 5.4 was used. We used a generic inverse variance method to calculate random effects models’ pool sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with 95% confidence interval keeping alpha criteria of 0.05 as significant. In this umbrella meta-analysis, 9 studies with 14,615 patients met inclusion criteria. Overall, pooled SN was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.87–0.90), SP was 0.85 (0.81–0.89), PLR was 6.07 (5.02–7.33), NLR was 1.99 (1.87–2.10), and DOR was 38.94 (31.96–47.46) (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.00001). The diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive CMR is comparable, if not superior to an invasive test like CCA.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Wall Motion Abnormalities and Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Umbrella Meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月29日

查看全文
  • Umabalan Thirupathy,
  • Srujana Konka,
  • Johnnie Saifa-Bonsu,
  • Nagaraj Sanchitha Honganur,
  • Mihir Dave,
  • Priya Savani,
  • Richa Jaiswal,
  • Tenzin Tamdin,
  • Farahnaz Noei,
  • Lokesh Manjani,
  • Urvish K. Patel,
  • Pratikkumar Vekaria

摘要

Conventional coronary angiography (CCA) is the gold standard for diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). It is an invasive test and carries risks. Reduced coronary flow is linked to increased mortality; thus, aggressively measuring coronary flow is important. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is an emerging non-invasive test which can assess ventricular function, myocardial perfusion, and detecting anomalies. We aimed to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of CMR compared to CCA through an umbrella meta-analysis. We searched PubMed articles comparing diagnostic accuracy of CMR with CCA in patients having CAD published from 2000 to 2022 according to PRISMA guidelines. RevMan 5.4 was used. We used a generic inverse variance method to calculate random effects models’ pool sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with 95% confidence interval keeping alpha criteria of 0.05 as significant. In this umbrella meta-analysis, 9 studies with 14,615 patients met inclusion criteria. Overall, pooled SN was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.87–0.90), SP was 0.85 (0.81–0.89), PLR was 6.07 (5.02–7.33), NLR was 1.99 (1.87–2.10), and DOR was 38.94 (31.96–47.46) (p < 0.00001). The diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive CMR is comparable, if not superior to an invasive test like CCA.