CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Prognostic impact of atrial fibrillation in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: a substudy of the IABP-SHOCK II trial Relationship Between Infarct Size and Outcomes Following Primary PCI: Patient-Level Analysis From 10 Randomized Trials Intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary bifurcation lesions: a review Predicting lifetime risk for developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in Chinese population: the China-PAR project Prognostic impact of non-culprit chronic total occlusions in infarct-related cardiogenic shock: results of the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial Risk of Early Adverse Events After Clopidogrel Discontinuation in Patients Undergoing Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: An Individual Participant Data Analysis Risk Stratification for Patients in Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction Non-eligibility for reperfusion therapy in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Contemporary insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Intracoronary Optical Coherence Tomography 2018: Current Status and Future Directions Predicting the 10-Year Risks of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Chinese Population: The China-PAR Project (Prediction for ASCVD Risk in China)
|<<... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...>>|

Review Article2018 May 29. [Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL：Eur Heart J. Article Link

The performance of non-invasive tests to rule-in and rule-out significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with stable angina: a meta-analysis focused on post-test disease probability

Knuuti J, Ballo H, Juarez-Orozco LE et al. Keywords: modality; non-invasive tests; coronary arterial disease

Abstract

AIMS- To determine the ranges of pre-test probability (PTP) of coronary artery disease (CAD) in which stress electrocardiogram (ECG), stress echocardiography, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET), and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) can reclassify patients into a post-testprobability that defines (>85%) or excludes (<15%) anatomically (defined by visual evaluation of invasive coronary angiography [ICA]) and functionally (defined by a fractional flow reserve [FFR] ≤0.8) significant CAD.


METHODS AND RESULTS - A broad search in electronic databases until August 2017 was performed. Studies on the aforementioned techniques in >100 patients with stable CAD that utilized either ICA or ICA with FFR measurement as reference, were included. Study-level data was pooled using a hierarchical bivariate random-effects model and likelihood ratios were obtained for each technique. The PTP ranges for each technique to rule-in or rule-out significant CAD were defined. A total of 28 664 patients from 132 studies that used ICA as reference and 4131 from 23 studies using FFR, were analysed. Stress ECG can rule-in and rule-out anatomically significant CAD only when PTP is ≥80% (76-83) and ≤19% (15-25), respectively. Coronary computed tomography angiography is able to rule-inanatomic CAD at a PTP ≥58% (45-70) and rule-out at a PTP ≤80% (65-94). The corresponding PTP values for functionally significantCAD were ≥75% (67-83) and ≤57% (40-72) for CCTA, and ≥71% (59-81) and ≤27 (24-31) for ICA, demonstrating poorer performance of anatomic imaging against FFR. In contrast, functional imaging techniques (PET, stress CMR, and SPECT) are able to rule-in functionally significant CAD when PTP is ≥46-59% and rule-out when PTP is ≤34-57%.


CONCLUSION- The various diagnostic modalities have different optimal performance ranges for the detection of anatomically and functionally significant CAD. Stress ECG appears to have very limited diagnostic power. The selection of a diagnostic technique for any given patient to rule-in or rule-out CAD should be based on the optimal PTP range for each test and on the assumed reference standard.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top