Diagnostic performance of 16- and 64-section spiral CT for coronary artery bypass graft assessment: Meta-analysis

Radiology

Volumn 247, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 679-686

  Hamon, Michèle ^a   Lepage, Olivier ^a   Malagutti, Patrizia ^c   Riddell, John W ^a   Morello, Rémy ^a   Agostini, Denis ^a   Hamon, Martial ^b  

^a CAEN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^b INSTITUT PASTEUR DE LILLE   (France)

^c S ANNA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANASTOMOSIS; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; DATA BASE; DATA EXTRACTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; GRAFT OCCLUSION; HUMAN; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOM SAMPLE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPIRAL COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; STANDARD; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STENOSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; METHODOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; RADIOGRAPHY;

CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; HUMANS; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, SPIRAL COMPUTED;

EID: 45149113330     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2473071132     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Gobel FL, Stewart WJ, Campeau L, et al. Safety of coronary arteriography in clinically stable patients following coronary bypass surgery: Post CABG Trial Investigators. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1998;45: 376-381.
2. Stein PD, Beemath A, Skaf E, et al. Usefulness of 4-,8- and 16-slice computed tomography for detection of graft occlusion or patency after coronary artery bypass grafting. Am J Cardiol 2005;96:1669-1673.
3. Whiting P, Harbord R, Kleijnen J. No role for quality scores in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005;5:19.
4. Deville WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, et al. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002;2:9.
5. Hamon M, Biondi-Zoccai G, Malagutti P, et al. Diagnostic performance of multislice spiral computed tomography of coronary arteries as compared against conventional invasive coronary angiography: a metaanalysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:1896-1910.
6. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 1993;12:1293-1316.
7. Walter SD. Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med 2002;21:1237-1256.
8. Lijmer JG, Bossuyt PM, Heisterkamp SH. Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Stat Med 2002;21:1525-1537.
9. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:31.
10. Halligan S, Altman DG. Evidence-based practice in radiology: step 3 and 4 - appraise and apply systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Radiology 2007;243:13-27.
11. Martuscelli E, Romagnoli A, D'Eliseo A, et al. Evaluation of venous and arterial conduit patency by 16-slice spiral computed tomography. Circulation 2004;110:3234-3238.
12. Schlosser T, Konorza T, Hunold P, Kühl H, Schmermund A, Barkhausen J. Noninvasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-detector row computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1224-1229.
13. Chiurlia E, Menozzi M, Ratti C, Romagnoli R, Modena MG. Follow-up of coronary artery bypass graft patency by multislice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2005;95: 1094-1097.
14. Salm LP, Bax JJ, Jukema W, et al. Comprehensive assessment of patients after coronary artery bypass grafting by 16-detectorrow computed tomography. Am Heart J 2005;150:775-781.
15. Trigo Bautista A, Estornell J, Ridocci F, et al. Non-invasive assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts by computed tomography: comparison with conventional coronary angiography [in Spanish]. Rev Esp Cardiol 2005;58:807-814. [Published correction appears in Rev Esp Cardiol 2005;58(10):1248.]
16. Vernhet-Kovacsik H, Battistella P, Demaria R, et al. Early postoperative assessment of coronary artery bypass graft patency and anatomy: value of contrast-enhanced 16-MDCT with retrospectively ECG-gated reconstructions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186(6 suppl 2):S395-S400.
17. Anders K, Baum U, Schmid M, et al. Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) patency: assessment with high resolution submillimeter 16-slice multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) versus coronary angiography. Eur J Radiol 2006;57: 336-344.
18. Burgstahler C, Beck T, Kuettner A, et al. Non-invasive evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-row multi-slice computed tomography with 188 ms temporal resolution. Int J Cardiol 2006;106:244-249.
19. Yamamoto M, Kimura F, Niinami H, Suda Y, Ueno E, Takeuchi Y. Noninvasive assessment of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery by 16-channel multidetector-row computed tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;81:820-827.
20. Malagutti P, Nieman K, Meijboom WB, et al. Use of 64-slice CT in symptomatic patients after coronary bypass surgery: evaluation of grafts and coronary arteries. Eur Heart J 2007;28:1879-1885.
21. Pache G, Saueressig U, Frydrychowicz A, et al. initial experience with 64-slice cardiac CT: non-invasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts. Eur Heart J 2006;27: 976-980.
22. Dikkers R, Willems TP, Tio RA, Anthonio RL, Zijlstra F, Oudkerk M. The benefit of 64-MDCT prior to invasive coronary angiography in symptomatic post-CABG patients. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2006;23:369-377.
23. Ropers D, Pohle FK, Kuettner A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive coronary angiography in patients after bypass surgery using 64-slice spiral computed tomography with 330-ms gantry rotation. Circulation 2006;114:2334-2341.
24. Meyer TS, Martinoff S, Hadamitzky M, et al. Improved non-invasive assessment of coronary artery bypass grafts with 64-slice computed tomographic angiography in an unselected patient population. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:946-950.
25. Jabara R, Chronos N, Klein L, et al. Comparison of multidetector 64-slice computed tomographic angiography to coronary angiography to assess the patency of coronary artery bypass grafts. Am J Cardiol 2007;99: 1529-1534.
26. Bourassa MG, Fisher LD, Campeau L, Gillespie MJ, McConney M, Lesperance J. Long-term fate of bypass grafts: the coronary artery surgery study (CASS) and Montreal Heart Institute experiences. Circulation 1985;72(6 pt 2):V71-V78.
27. Feuchtner GM, Schachner T, Bonaros N, et al. Evaluation of ascending aortic atherosclerosis with 16-multidetector computed tomography is useful before total endoscopic coronary bypass surgery. Heart Surg Forum 2006;9:E754-E758.