Back to Search
Start Over
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.
- Source :
-
European heart journal [Eur Heart J] 2018 Sep 14; Vol. 39 (35), pp. 3322-3330. - Publication Year :
- 2018
-
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-test probability 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.<br />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-in anatomic CAD at a PTP ≥58% (45-70) and rule-out at a PTP ≤80% (65-94). The corresponding PTP values for functionally significant CAD 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%.<br />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.
- Subjects :
- Angina, Stable etiology
Computed Tomography Angiography
Coronary Angiography
Echocardiography, Stress
Electrocardiography
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Angiography
Positron-Emission Tomography
Probability
Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography
Angina, Stable diagnostic imaging
Coronary Stenosis diagnostic imaging
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1522-9645
- Volume :
- 39
- Issue :
- 35
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- European heart journal
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 29850808
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy267