Li Han, Hou Mingjia, Jiao Yujia, Zhong Songran, Chen Weiwei
Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Eur Radiol. 2025 Aug 28. doi: 10.1007/s00330-025-11965-8.
The diagnosis of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) remains challenging due to limited consensus on the optimal imaging modality. MR black-blood thrombus imaging (MRBTI), contrast-enhanced MR imaging (CE-MRI), and noncontrast-enhanced MR venography (NCE-MRV) are promising modalities. This study aims to evaluate the performance of these modalities in diagnosing CVT.
PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were systematically searched from inception to March 2025. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of MRBTI, CE-MRI, and NCE-MRV for CVT were included. A bivariate random-effects model was used to calculate the summary accuracy metrics with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sources of heterogeneity were explored through meta-regression, subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was assessed using Deeks' funnel plot.
Fifteen studies involving 49 cohorts (1401 patients and 4846 venous segments) were included. MRBTI achieved significantly higher sensitivity, 98% (95% CI: 95-99%), and specificity, 99% (95% CI: 97-100%) than CE-MRI and NCE-MRV (p < 0.05 for both). NCE-MRV (89%; 95% CI: 78-95%) demonstrated higher sensitivity than CE-MRI (76%; 95% CI: 67-83%) (p = 0.045), at the expense of specificity (NCE-MRV: 89%, 95% CI: 79-94%; CE-MRI: 97%, 95% CI: 93-98%; p = 0.04). Study design influenced heterogeneity in both MRBTI and CE-MRI studies, with diagnostic level and scanning mode affecting heterogeneity in MRBTI and CE-MRI, respectively.
MRBTI demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy for CVT compared to CE-MRI and NCE-MRV. Prospective multi-center studies are required to standardize MRBTI protocols and validate its reliability as a standalone diagnostic modality for CVT.
Question The diagnostic accuracy for CVT of MRBTI, CE-MRI, and NCE-MRV remains unclear. Findings Pooled data demonstrate that MRBTI exhibits superior diagnostic performance for CVT in comparison with CE-MRI and NCE-MRV. Clinical relevance MRBTI demonstrates high diagnostic accuracy for CVT, facilitating earlier diagnosis and improving patient outcomes. Further studies should standardize MRBTI protocols and validate its reliability as a standalone diagnostic tool for CVT, thereby optimizing workflow, reducing scan time, and improving cost-effectiveness.
由于对于最佳成像方式的共识有限,脑静脉血栓形成(CVT)的诊断仍然具有挑战性。磁共振黑血血栓成像(MRBTI)、对比增强磁共振成像(CE-MRI)和非对比增强磁共振静脉成像(NCE-MRV)是很有前景的成像方式。本研究旨在评估这些成像方式在诊断CVT中的性能。
对PubMed、Web of Science和Embase数据库从创建至2025年3月进行系统检索。纳入评估MRBTI、CE-MRI和NCE-MRV对CVT诊断准确性的研究。采用双变量随机效应模型计算具有95%置信区间(CI)的汇总准确性指标。通过Meta回归、亚组分析和敏感性分析探索异质性来源。使用Deeks漏斗图评估发表偏倚。
纳入15项研究,涉及49个队列(1401例患者和4846个静脉节段)。MRBTI的敏感性显著高于CE-MRI和NCE-MRV,分别为98%(95%CI:95-99%)和特异性99%(95%CI:97-100%)(两者p<0.05)。NCE-MRV(89%;95%CI:78-95%)的敏感性高于CE-MRI(76%;95%CI:67-83%)(p=0.045),但特异性较低(NCE-MRV:89%,95%CI:79-94%;CE-MRI:97%,95%CI:93-98%;p=0.04)。研究设计影响MRBTI和CE-MRI研究中的异质性,诊断水平和扫描模式分别影响MRBTI和CE-MRI中的异质性。
与CE-MRI和NCE-MRV相比,MRBTI在诊断CVT方面显示出更高的诊断准确性。需要进行前瞻性多中心研究来规范MRBTI方案,并验证其作为CVT独立诊断方式的可靠性。
问题MRBTI、CE-MRI和NCE-MRV对CVT的诊断准确性仍不明确。发现汇总数据表明,与CE-MRI和NCE-MRV相比,MRBTI在诊断CVT方面具有更高的诊断性能。临床意义MRBTI在诊断CVT方面显示出高准确性,有助于早期诊断并改善患者预后。进一步的研究应规范MRBTI方案,并验证其作为CVT独立诊断工具的可靠性,从而优化工作流程、减少扫描时间并提高成本效益。