CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

North American Expert Review of Rotational Atherectomy Treating Bifurcation Lesions: The Result Overcomes the Technique Orbital atherectomy for the treatment of small (2.5mm) severely calcified coronary lesions: ORBIT II sub-analysis Pulmonary hypertension is associated with an increased incidence of NAFLD: A retrospective cohort study of 18,910 patients Pivotal trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the orbital atherectomy system in treating de novo, severely calcified coronary lesions (ORBIT II) Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons in In-Stent Restenosis: The RESTORE ISR China Randomized Trial Right ventricular expression of NT-proBNP adds predictive value to REVEAL score in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension Drug-Coated Balloon for De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Temporal changes in radial access use, associates and outcomes in patients undergoing PCI using rotational atherectomy between 2007 and 2014: results from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society national database Healed coronary plaque rupture as a cause of rapid lesion progression: a case demonstrated with in vivo histopathology by directional coronary atherectomy

Original Research2019 Aug 6. doi: 10.7326/M19-1337.

JOURNAL:Ann Intern Med. Article Link

Comparative Accuracy of Focused Cardiac Ultrasonography and Clinical Examination for Left Ventricular Dysfunction and Valvular Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Marbach JA, Almufleh A, Di Santo P et al. Keywords: cardiac ultrasonography; valvular heart disease

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Incorporating focused cardiac ultrasonography (FoCUS) into clinical examination could improve the diagnostic yield of bedside patient evaluation.

 

PURPOSE - To compare the accuracy of FoCUS-assisted clinical assessment versus clinical assessment alone for diagnosing left ventricular dysfunction or valvular disease in adults having cardiovascular evaluation.

 

DATA SOURCES - English-language searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science from 1 January 1990 to 23 May 2019 and review of reference citations.

 

STUDY SELECTION - Eligible studies were done in patients having cardiovascular evaluation; compared FoCUS-assisted clinical assessment versus clinical assessment alone for the diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction, aortic or mitral valve disease, or pericardial effusion; and used transthoracic echocardiography as the reference standard.

 

DATA EXTRACTION - Three study investigators independently abstracted data and assessed study quality.

 

DATA SYNTHESIS - Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. The sensitivity of clinical assessment for diagnosing left ventricular dysfunction (left ventricular ejection fraction <50%) was 43% (95% CI, 33% to 54%), whereas that of FoCUS-assisted examination was 84% (CI, 74% to 91%). The specificity of clinical assessment was 81% (CI, 65% to 90%), and that of FoCUS-assisted examination was 89% (CI, 85% to 91%). The sensitivities of clinical assessment and FoCUS-assisted examination for diagnosing aortic or mitral valve disease (of at least moderate severity) were 46% (CI, 35% to 58%) and 71% (CI, 63% to 79%), respectively. Both the clinical assessment and the FoCUS-assisted examination had a specificity of 94% (CI, 91% to 96%).

 

LIMITATION - Evidence was scant, persons doing ultrasonography had variable skill levels, and most studies had unclear or high risk of bias.

 

CONCLUSION - Clinical examination assisted by FoCUS has greater sensitivity, but not greater specificity, than clinical assessment alone for identifying left ventricular dysfunction and aortic or mitral valve disease; FoCUS-assisted examination may help rule out cardiovascular pathology in some patients, but it may not be sufficient for definitive confirmation of cardiovascular disease suspected on physical examination.

 

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE - None. (PROSPERO: CRD42019124318).