Suppr超能文献

心脏计算机断层扫描和磁共振成像与经食管超声心动图诊断左心耳血栓。

Cardiac computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging vs. transoesophageal echocardiography for diagnosing left atrial appendage thrombi.

机构信息

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Ave, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Europace. 2019 Jan 1;21(1):e1-e10. doi: 10.1093/europace/euy142.

Abstract

AIMS

Transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) is the gold standard for identification of left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombi. However, TOE is semi-invasive and cannot be performed in certain patients. Left atrial appendage thrombi can also be identified by cardiac computed tomography (CCT) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR); however, the diagnostic performance of these techniques vs. TOE is unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 CCT and 4 CMR studies comparing diagnostic performance to TOE for identification of LAA thrombi. Meta-regression was performed to determine whether expected sensitivity and specificity differed between early and delayed image acquisition protocols for CCT vs. TOE and between CCT and CMR. Cardiac computed tomography demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 0.99 [confidence interval (CI 0.93-1.00)] and 0.94 (CI 0.90-0.97) respectively vs. TOE. A subgroup analysis comparing early vs. delayed protocol CCT imaging was performed showing no significant differences in sensitivity (P-value = 0.17) however improved specificity of the delayed imaging protocols (P-value = 0.04). Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 0.80 (CI 0.63-0.91) and 0.98 (CI 0.97-0.99), respectively when compared to TOE. There was no significant difference in sensitivity or specificity between CMR and CCT (P-values 0.996 and 0.484, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Cardiac computed tomography and CMR had good to excellent sensitivity and specificity vs. TOE. Further, there was no significant difference in the sensitivity and specificity of CCT vs. CMR, suggesting that both modalities can be considered reasonable alternatives to TOE in the identification of LAA thrombi. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging may be especially beneficial when TOE and CCT cannot be performed.

摘要

目的

经食管超声心动图(TOE)是识别左心耳(LAA)血栓的金标准。然而,TOE 是半侵入性的,某些患者无法进行。心脏计算机断层扫描(CCT)和心脏磁共振成像(CMR)也可以识别左心耳血栓;然而,这些技术与 TOE 相比的诊断性能尚不清楚。

方法和结果

我们对 22 项 CCT 和 4 项 CMR 研究进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,比较了这些技术与 TOE 识别 LAA 血栓的诊断性能。进行了元回归分析,以确定 CCT 与 TOE 之间以及 CCT 与 CMR 之间早期和延迟图像采集方案的预期敏感性和特异性是否存在差异。CCT 显示出 0.99(置信区间 0.93-1.00)的敏感性和 0.94(置信区间 0.90-0.97)的特异性,与 TOE 相比。进行了一项亚组分析,比较了早期与延迟 CCT 成像方案,结果显示敏感性无显著差异(P 值=0.17),但延迟成像方案的特异性提高(P 值=0.04)。CMR 与 TOE 相比,显示出 0.80(置信区间 0.63-0.91)的敏感性和 0.98(置信区间 0.97-0.99)的特异性。CMR 和 CCT 之间的敏感性或特异性无显著差异(P 值分别为 0.996 和 0.484)。

结论

CCT 和 CMR 与 TOE 相比具有良好到极好的敏感性和特异性。此外,CCT 与 CMR 的敏感性和特异性无显著差异,这表明这两种方式在识别 LAA 血栓方面都可以作为 TOE 的合理替代方案。当无法进行 TOE 和 CCT 时,心脏磁共振成像可能特别有益。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验