Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Versus Fractional Flow Reserve: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Assessment of the Efficiency of Non-Invasive Diagnostic Imaging Modalities for Detecting Myocardial Ischemia in Patients Suspected of Having Stable Angina

This study aimed to assess and compare the efficiency of non-invasive imaging modalities in detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with suspected stable angina as easy-to-understand indices. Our study included 1000 patients with chest pain and possible stable myocardial ischemia. The modalities to be assessed were cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI), single-photon emission computed tomography, positron emission computed tomography (PET), stress echocardiography, and fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography (FFRCT). As a simulation study, we assumed that all five imaging modalities were performed on these patients, and a decision tree analysis was conducted. From the results, the following efficiencies were assessed and compared: (1) number of true positive (TP), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), and true negative (TN) test results; (2) positive predictive value (PPV); (3) negative predictive value (NPV); (4) post-test probability; (5) diagnostic accuracy (DA); and (6) number needed to diagnose (NND). In the basic settings (pre-test probability: 30%), PET generated the highest TP (267) and NPV (95%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 93-96%). In contrast, CMRI produced the highest TN (616), PPV (76%, 95% CI: 71-80%), and DA (88%, 95% CI: 86-90%) and the lowest NND (1.33, 95% CI: 1.24-1.47). Although FFRCT generated the highest TP (267) and lowest FN (33), it generated the highest FP (168). In terms of detecting myocardial ischemia, compared with the other modalities, PET and CMRI were more efficient. The results of our study might be helpful for both patients and medical professionals associated with their examination.

Safety and Efficacy of Colchicine in Patients with Stable CAD and ACS: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence from recent trials has shown conflicting results in terms of the utility of colchicine in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

Multiple databases were queried to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the merits of colchicine in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or stable CAD. The pooled relative risk ratio (RR) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), its components, and gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events were computed using a random-effect model.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs comprising a total of 12,761 patients were identified. At a median follow-up of 12 months, there was a significantly lower risk of MACE [RR 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-96], ACS (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.96), ischemic stroke (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22-0.81), and need for revascularization (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-90) in patients receiving colchicine compared with placebo. A subgroup analysis based on the clinical presentation showed that the significantly lower incidence of MACE and stroke were driven by the patients presenting with ACS. The use of colchicine in patients with stable CAD did not reduce the incidence of MACE (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.28-1.09), ACS (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.25-1.08), or stroke (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.33-1.13). There was no significant difference in the relative risk of cardiac arrest, ACS, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality between the two groups in both ACS and stable CAD populations. The risk of GI adverse events was significantly higher in patients receiving colchicine (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.12-3.95).

CONCLUSION

In patients presenting with ACS, low-dose colchicine might reduce the incidence of MACE, stroke, and the need for revascularization at long follow-up durations. Colchicine might offer no benefits in reducing the risk of ischemic events in patients with stable angina.

Diagnostic Performance of CMR, SPECT, and PET Imaging for the Identification of Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Myocardial perfusion imaging modalities, such as cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET), are well-established non-invasive diagnostic methods to detect hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare CMR, SPECT, and PET in the diagnosis of CAD and to provide evidence for further research and clinical decision-making.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched. Studies that used CMR, SPECT, and/or PET for the diagnosis of CAD were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio with their respective 95% confidence interval, and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were calculated.

Results: A total of 203 articles were identified for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity values of CMR, SPECT, and PET were 0.86, 0.83, and 0.85, respectively. Their respective overall specificity values were 0.83, 0.77, and 0.86. Results in subgroup analysis of the performance of SPECT with ²⁰¹Tl showed the highest pooled sensitivity [0.85 (0.82, 0.88)] and specificity [0.80 (0.75, 0.83)]. ^99mTc-tetrofosmin had the lowest sensitivity [0.76 (0.67, 0.82)]. In the subgroup analysis of PET tracers, results indicated that ¹³N had the lowest pooled sensitivity [0.83 (0.74, 0.89)], and the specificity was the highest [0.91 (0.81, 0.96)].

Conclusion: Our meta-analysis indicates that CMR and PET present better diagnostic performance for the detection of CAD as compared with SPECT.