心脏淀粉样变性中相对心尖疏松的诊断准确性和预后价值--系统回顾和元分析。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Circulation Journal Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1253/circj.CJ-24-0472
Chung-Yen Lee, Yosuke Nabeshima, Tetsuji Kitano, Li-Tan Yang, Masaaki Takeuchi
{"title":"心脏淀粉样变性中相对心尖疏松的诊断准确性和预后价值--系统回顾和元分析。","authors":"Chung-Yen Lee, Yosuke Nabeshima, Tetsuji Kitano, Li-Tan Yang, Masaaki Takeuchi","doi":"10.1253/circj.CJ-24-0472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although the relative apical sparing (RAPS) pattern of left ventricular (LV) longitudinal strain is a hallmark of cardiac amyloidosis, recent studies have raised concerns about its accuracy. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) and prognostic impact of RAPS in cardiac amyloidosis.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for manuscripts that could potentially be used in the DTA arm and prognosis arm. Thirty-seven studies were used for DTA analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 54-68%), 83% (95% CI 80-86%), and 8.9 (95% CI 6.1-13.1), respectively. These values did not differ regardless of the presence of aortic stenosis, but the diagnostic odds ratio differed significantly among analytical software packages. For the prognosis arm, 6 studies were dichotomously assessed for RAPS, and 5 were assessed quantitatively. The pooled proportion of RAPS was 49% and the pooled estimate of the RAPS ratio was 1.40. Although RAPS was associated with outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87; 95% CI 1.15-3.04; P=0.011), its significance disappeared after trim and fill analysis (HR 1.42; 95% CI 0.85-2.38; P=0.184).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RAPS has a modest DTA with a significant vendor dependency and does not provide robust prognostic information.</p>","PeriodicalId":50691,"journal":{"name":"Circulation Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Relative Apical Sparing in Cardiac Amyloidosis - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Chung-Yen Lee, Yosuke Nabeshima, Tetsuji Kitano, Li-Tan Yang, Masaaki Takeuchi\",\"doi\":\"10.1253/circj.CJ-24-0472\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although the relative apical sparing (RAPS) pattern of left ventricular (LV) longitudinal strain is a hallmark of cardiac amyloidosis, recent studies have raised concerns about its accuracy. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) and prognostic impact of RAPS in cardiac amyloidosis.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for manuscripts that could potentially be used in the DTA arm and prognosis arm. Thirty-seven studies were used for DTA analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 54-68%), 83% (95% CI 80-86%), and 8.9 (95% CI 6.1-13.1), respectively. These values did not differ regardless of the presence of aortic stenosis, but the diagnostic odds ratio differed significantly among analytical software packages. For the prognosis arm, 6 studies were dichotomously assessed for RAPS, and 5 were assessed quantitatively. The pooled proportion of RAPS was 49% and the pooled estimate of the RAPS ratio was 1.40. Although RAPS was associated with outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87; 95% CI 1.15-3.04; P=0.011), its significance disappeared after trim and fill analysis (HR 1.42; 95% CI 0.85-2.38; P=0.184).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RAPS has a modest DTA with a significant vendor dependency and does not provide robust prognostic information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50691,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-24-0472\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-24-0472","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:虽然左心室(LV)纵向应变的相对心尖疏松(RAPS)模式是心脏淀粉样变性的标志,但最近的研究对其准确性提出了担忧。本系统性综述旨在研究 RAPS 对心脏淀粉样变性的诊断测试准确性(DTA)和预后影响:我们在PubMed、Embase和Scopus上搜索了有可能用于DTA部分和预后部分的手稿。37项研究被用于DTA分析。汇总的敏感性、特异性和诊断几率比分别为 61%(95% 置信区间 [CI] 54-68%)、83%(95% CI 80-86%)和 8.9(95% CI 6.1-13.1)。无论是否存在主动脉狭窄,这些数值都没有差异,但不同分析软件包的诊断几率比差异很大。在预后部分,6 项研究对 RAPS 进行了二分法评估,5 项进行了定量评估。RAPS的汇总比例为49%,RAPS比值的汇总估计值为1.40。尽管RAPS与结果相关(危险比[HR] 1.87; 95% CI 1.15-3.04;P=0.011),但经过修剪和填充分析后,其显著性消失了(HR 1.42; 95% CI 0.85-2.38;P=0.184):RAPS的DTA不高,对供应商有明显依赖性,不能提供可靠的预后信息。
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
Diagnostic Accuracy and Prognostic Value of Relative Apical Sparing in Cardiac Amyloidosis - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Although the relative apical sparing (RAPS) pattern of left ventricular (LV) longitudinal strain is a hallmark of cardiac amyloidosis, recent studies have raised concerns about its accuracy. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) and prognostic impact of RAPS in cardiac amyloidosis.

Methods and results: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for manuscripts that could potentially be used in the DTA arm and prognosis arm. Thirty-seven studies were used for DTA analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 54-68%), 83% (95% CI 80-86%), and 8.9 (95% CI 6.1-13.1), respectively. These values did not differ regardless of the presence of aortic stenosis, but the diagnostic odds ratio differed significantly among analytical software packages. For the prognosis arm, 6 studies were dichotomously assessed for RAPS, and 5 were assessed quantitatively. The pooled proportion of RAPS was 49% and the pooled estimate of the RAPS ratio was 1.40. Although RAPS was associated with outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87; 95% CI 1.15-3.04; P=0.011), its significance disappeared after trim and fill analysis (HR 1.42; 95% CI 0.85-2.38; P=0.184).

Conclusions: RAPS has a modest DTA with a significant vendor dependency and does not provide robust prognostic information.

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
Circulation Journal
Circulation Journal 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
471
审稿时长
1.6 months
期刊介绍: Circulation publishes original research manuscripts, review articles, and other content related to cardiovascular health and disease, including observational studies, clinical trials, epidemiology, health services and outcomes studies, and advances in basic and translational research.
期刊最新文献
Early Outcomes Following Transcatheter Closure With the Amplatzer Vascular Plug and Duct Occluder for Mitral Paravalvular Leak in Japanese Patients. Prognostic Value of Endogenous-Type Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction After Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Maternal Death Due to Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension - A Nationwide Survey in Japan. Concomitant Mitral Regurgitation in Severe Aortic Stenosis - Insights From the CURRENT AS Registry-2. Five-Year Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes in Chronic Hemodialysis vs. Non-Hemodialysis Patients Using Balloon-Expandable Devices.
×
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