CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Characterization of lesions undergoing ischemia-driven revascularization after complete revascularization versus culprit lesion only in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease - A DANAMI-3-PRIMULTI substudy Utility and Challenges of an Early Invasive Strategy in Patients Resuscitated From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Long-Term Outcomes of Patients With Late Presentation of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An ACC /SCAI Consensus Statement 4-Step Protocol for Disparities in STEMI Care and Outcomes in Women Early Natural History of Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial Effect of Pre-Hospital Crushed Prasugrel Tablets in Patients with STEMI Planned for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Randomized COMPARE CRUSH Trial
|<<... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ...>>|

Review Article2018 Feb 1;252:229-233.

JOURNAL：Int J Cardiol. Article Link

Diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance for the detection of coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Kiaos A, Tziatzios I, Karamitsos TD et al. Keywords: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Coronary artery disease; Diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis; Stress perfusion

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION - The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of qualitative stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) to diagnose ischemia-causing lesions according to different definitions of significant coronary artery disease (CAD), and magnetic field strength.


METHODS - We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for studies evaluating diagnostic performance of qualitative stress perfusion CMR for diagnosis of CAD versus coronary angiography or fractionalflow reserve (FFR) from inception to 10 September 2017. We used hierarchical models to synthesize the available data.


RESULTS - Sixty-seven studies (7113 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The patient-based analysis of studies using FFR as the reference standard demonstrated a mean sensitivity of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.93) and a mean specificity of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.80-0.89). The patient-based analyses for detecting coronary stenosis ≥50% and coronary stenosis ≥70% at 1.5T and for detecting coronary stenosis ≥50% and coronary stenosis ≥70%, at 3T, demonstrated a mean sensitivity of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84), 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.89), 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82-0.95), and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-0.96), respectively; with a mean specificity of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71-0.80), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.71-0.81), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.69-0.86), and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.59-0.85).


CONCLUSION - Qualitative stress perfusion CMR has high accuracy for the diagnosis of CAD, irrespective of the reference standard and the magnet strength. Studies using FFR as the reference standard had higher diagnostic accuracy on a patient level compared to studies using coronary angiography, with a notable difference in specificity.


Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top