4.6 Review

A systematic review and meta-analysis of multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 221, 期 -, 页码 898-905

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.06.264

关键词

CT coronary angiography; Invasive coronary angiography; Coronary artery bypass graft surgery; Meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of more recent computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in the assessment of graft patency after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Material and methods: A systematic review was performed using nine electronic databases from their dates of inception to July 2015. Predefined inclusion criteria included studies reporting on comparative outcomes using >= 64 slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and ICA. The primary endpoints included graft occlusion and significant graft stenosis >= 50%. Secondary analyses included the comparison of arterial versus venous graft conduits, and the use of different MDCT techniques. Results: Thirty-one studies were identified according to selection criteria, involving 1975 patients with 5364 assessed grafts. Combined assessment of stenosis and occlusion for all grafts demonstrated a sensitivity of 96.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 94.3-97.4%] and specificity of 96.3% (95% CI 95.1-97.3%). CTCA assessment of venous grafts demonstrated higher sensitivity compared to arterial grafts, when testing for both occlusion and stenosis (97.6% vs 89.2%, p = 0.004). Conclusion: Results of this study demonstrated that CTCA had a relatively high pooled sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value compared to ICA. However, patient baseline characteristics varied between studies, and the results should be interpreted with caution. Nonetheless, our results indicate that CTCA should be recognized as an accurate and non-invasive investigation for graft patency in symptomatic patients after CABG. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据