经胸超声心动图与心脏磁共振成像在检测左心室血栓方面的系统性回顾和荟萃分析。

European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice Pub Date : 2023-12-07 eCollection Date: 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1093/ehjimp/qyad041
YuZhi Phuah, Ying Xin Tan, Sheref Zaghloul, Sharmaine Sim, Joshua Wong, Saba Usmani, Lily Snell, Karish Thavabalan, Carmen Lucia García-Pérez, Niraj S Kumar, Hannah Glatzel, Reubeen Rashid Ahmad, Luciano Candilio, Jonathan J H Bray, Mahmood Ahmed, Rui Providencia
{"title":"经胸超声心动图与心脏磁共振成像在检测左心室血栓方面的系统性回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"YuZhi Phuah, Ying Xin Tan, Sheref Zaghloul, Sharmaine Sim, Joshua Wong, Saba Usmani, Lily Snell, Karish Thavabalan, Carmen Lucia García-Pérez, Niraj S Kumar, Hannah Glatzel, Reubeen Rashid Ahmad, Luciano Candilio, Jonathan J H Bray, Mahmood Ahmed, Rui Providencia","doi":"10.1093/ehjimp/qyad041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the most commonly used imaging modality to diagnose left ventricular thrombus (LVT), however, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) remains the gold standard investigation. A comparison of the diagnostic performance between two modalities is needed to inform guidelines on a diagnostic approach towards LVT. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the diagnostic performance of three methods of TTE (non-contrast, contrast, and apical wall motion scoring) for the detection of LVT compared to CMR as a reference test. Studies comprising 2113 patients investigated for LVT using both TTE and CMR were included in the meta-analysis. For non-contrast TTE, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 47% [95% confidence interval (CI): 32-62%], and 98% (95% CI: 96-99%), respectively. In contrast, TTE pooled sensitivity and specificity values were 58% (95% CI: 46-69%), and 98% (95% CI: 96-99%), respectively. Apical wall motion scoring on non-contrast TTE yielded a sensitivity of 100% [95% CI: 93-100%] and a specificity of 54% (95% CI: 42-65%). The area under the curve (AUC) values from our summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) for non-contrast and contrast TTE were 0.87 and 0.86 respectively, with apical wall motion studies having the highest AUC of 0.93. Despite high specificity, routine contrast and non-contrast TTE are likely to miss a significant number of LVT, making it a suboptimal screening tool. The addition of apical wall motion scoring provides a promising method to reliably identify patients requiring further investigations for LVT, whilst excluding others from unnecessary testing.</p>","PeriodicalId":94317,"journal":{"name":"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice","volume":"1 2","pages":"qyad041"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11240154/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review and meta-analysis of transthoracic echocardiogram vs. cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of left ventricular thrombus.\",\"authors\":\"YuZhi Phuah, Ying Xin Tan, Sheref Zaghloul, Sharmaine Sim, Joshua Wong, Saba Usmani, Lily Snell, Karish Thavabalan, Carmen Lucia García-Pérez, Niraj S Kumar, Hannah Glatzel, Reubeen Rashid Ahmad, Luciano Candilio, Jonathan J H Bray, Mahmood Ahmed, Rui Providencia\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ehjimp/qyad041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the most commonly used imaging modality to diagnose left ventricular thrombus (LVT), however, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) remains the gold standard investigation. A comparison of the diagnostic performance between two modalities is needed to inform guidelines on a diagnostic approach towards LVT. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the diagnostic performance of three methods of TTE (non-contrast, contrast, and apical wall motion scoring) for the detection of LVT compared to CMR as a reference test. Studies comprising 2113 patients investigated for LVT using both TTE and CMR were included in the meta-analysis. For non-contrast TTE, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 47% [95% confidence interval (CI): 32-62%], and 98% (95% CI: 96-99%), respectively. In contrast, TTE pooled sensitivity and specificity values were 58% (95% CI: 46-69%), and 98% (95% CI: 96-99%), respectively. Apical wall motion scoring on non-contrast TTE yielded a sensitivity of 100% [95% CI: 93-100%] and a specificity of 54% (95% CI: 42-65%). The area under the curve (AUC) values from our summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) for non-contrast and contrast TTE were 0.87 and 0.86 respectively, with apical wall motion studies having the highest AUC of 0.93. Despite high specificity, routine contrast and non-contrast TTE are likely to miss a significant number of LVT, making it a suboptimal screening tool. The addition of apical wall motion scoring provides a promising method to reliably identify patients requiring further investigations for LVT, whilst excluding others from unnecessary testing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"qyad041\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11240154/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjimp/qyad041\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjimp/qyad041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

经胸超声心动图(TTE)是诊断左心室血栓(LVT)最常用的成像方式,但心脏磁共振(CMR)仍是金标准检查。需要对两种模式的诊断性能进行比较,以便为左心室血栓的诊断方法提供指导。我们进行了一项系统性回顾和荟萃分析,研究了三种 TTE 方法(非对比、对比和心尖壁运动评分)与作为参考检查的 CMR 相比在检测 LVT 方面的诊断性能。荟萃分析纳入了 2113 例同时使用 TTE 和 CMR 检测左心室室间隔缺损的患者。对于非对比 TTE,汇总的敏感性和特异性分别为 47% [95% 置信区间 (CI):32-62%] 和 98% (95% CI:96-99%)。相比之下,TTE 的集合敏感性和特异性分别为 58%(95% 置信区间:46-69%)和 98%(95% 置信区间:96-99%)。非对比 TTE 心尖壁运动评分的敏感性为 100%[95%CI:93-100%],特异性为 54%(95%CI:42-65%)。非对比和对比 TTE 的受体操作特征曲线(SROC)的曲线下面积(AUC)值分别为 0.87 和 0.86,其中心尖壁运动研究的 AUC 值最高,为 0.93。尽管特异性很高,但常规造影剂和非造影剂 TTE 可能会漏诊大量 LVT,使其成为一种不理想的筛查工具。增加心尖壁运动评分提供了一种有前途的方法,既能可靠地识别需要进一步检查左心室造影的患者,又能将其他患者排除在不必要的检查之外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A systematic review and meta-analysis of transthoracic echocardiogram vs. cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of left ventricular thrombus.

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the most commonly used imaging modality to diagnose left ventricular thrombus (LVT), however, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) remains the gold standard investigation. A comparison of the diagnostic performance between two modalities is needed to inform guidelines on a diagnostic approach towards LVT. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the diagnostic performance of three methods of TTE (non-contrast, contrast, and apical wall motion scoring) for the detection of LVT compared to CMR as a reference test. Studies comprising 2113 patients investigated for LVT using both TTE and CMR were included in the meta-analysis. For non-contrast TTE, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 47% [95% confidence interval (CI): 32-62%], and 98% (95% CI: 96-99%), respectively. In contrast, TTE pooled sensitivity and specificity values were 58% (95% CI: 46-69%), and 98% (95% CI: 96-99%), respectively. Apical wall motion scoring on non-contrast TTE yielded a sensitivity of 100% [95% CI: 93-100%] and a specificity of 54% (95% CI: 42-65%). The area under the curve (AUC) values from our summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) for non-contrast and contrast TTE were 0.87 and 0.86 respectively, with apical wall motion studies having the highest AUC of 0.93. Despite high specificity, routine contrast and non-contrast TTE are likely to miss a significant number of LVT, making it a suboptimal screening tool. The addition of apical wall motion scoring provides a promising method to reliably identify patients requiring further investigations for LVT, whilst excluding others from unnecessary testing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Severe concentric hypertrophy after cardiac arrest makes support with ECPELLA® impossible. How to address the coronaries in TAVI candidates: can the need for revascularization be safely determined by CT angiography only? Feasibility validation of automatic diagnosis of mitral valve prolapse from multi-view echocardiographic sequences based on deep neural network. A tri-leaflet mitral valve with left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy. CT-FFR by expanding coronary tree with Newton-Krylov-Schwarz method to solve the governing equations of CFD.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1