MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022712558

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis.

2010· article· en· W3022712558 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Medical Advisory Secretariat

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronary artery diseaseMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingCardiologyCardiac magnetic resonance imagingCardiac magnetic resonanceRadiologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In July 2009, the Medical Advisory Secretariat (MAS) began work on Non-Invasive Cardiac Imaging Technologies for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease (CAD), an evidence-based review of the literature surrounding different cardiac imaging modalities to ensure that appropriate technologies are accessed by patients suspected of having CAD. This project came about when the Health Services Branch at the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care asked MAS to provide an evidentiary platform on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-invasive cardiac imaging modalities.After an initial review of the strategy and consultation with experts, MAS identified five key non-invasive cardiac imaging technologies for the diagnosis of CAD. Evidence-based analyses have been prepared for each of these five imaging modalities: cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, single photon emission computed tomography, 64-slice computed tomographic angiography, stress echocardiography, and stress echocardiography with contrast. For each technology, an economic analysis was also completed (where appropriate). A summary decision analytic model was then developed to encapsulate the data from each of these reports (available on the OHTAC and MAS website).The Non-Invasive Cardiac Imaging Technologies for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease series is made up of the following reports, which can be publicly accessed at the MAS website at: www.health.gov.on.ca/mas or at www.health.gov.on.ca/english/providers/program/mas/mas_about.htmlSINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: An Evidence-Based AnalysisSTRESS ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: An Evidence-Based AnalysisSTRESS ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY WITH CONTRAST FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: An Evidence-Based Analysis64-Slice Computed Tomographic Angiography for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease: An Evidence-Based AnalysisCARDIAC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: An Evidence-Based AnalysisPease note that two related evidence-based analyses of non-invasive cardiac imaging technologies for the assessment of myocardial viability are also available on the MAS website:POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF MYOCARDIAL VIABILITY: An Evidence-Based AnalysisMAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF MYOCARDIAL VIABILITY: an Evidence-Based AnalysisThe Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative has also produced an associated economic report entitled:The Relative Cost-effectiveness of Five Non-invasive Cardiac Imaging Technologies for Diagnosing Coronary Artery Disease in Ontario [Internet]. Available from: http://theta.utoronto.ca/reports/?id=7 OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of patients with known/suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) compared to coronary angiography. CARDIAC MRI: Stress cardiac MRI is a non-invasive, x-ray free imaging technique that takes approximately 30 to 45 minutes to complete and can be performed using to two different methods, a) perfusion imaging following a first pass of an intravenous bolus of gadolinium contrast, or b) wall motion imaging. Stress is induced pharmacologically with either dobutamine, dipyridamole, or adenosine, as physical exercise is difficult to perform within the magnet bore and often induces motion artifacts. Alternatives to stress cardiac perfusion MRI include stress single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and stress echocardiography (ECHO). The advantage of cardiac MRI is that it does not pose the radiation burden associated with SPECT. During the same sitting, cardiac MRI can also assess left and right ventricular dimensions, viability, and cardiac mass. It may also mitigate the need for invasive diagnostic coronary angiography in patients with intermediate risk factors for CAD. EVIDENCE-BASED ANALYSIS: LITERATURE SEARCH: A literature search was performed on October 9, 2009 using OVID MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library, and the International Agency for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) for studies published from January 1, 2005 to October 9, 2008. Abstracts were reviewed by a single reviewer and, for those studies meeting the eligibility criteria, full-text articles were obtained. Reference lists were also examined for any relevant studies not identified through the search. Articles with unknown eligibility were reviewed with a second clinical epidemiologist and then a group of epidemiologists until consensus was established. The quality of evidence was assessed as high, moderate, low or very low according to GRADE methodology. Given the large amount of clinical heterogeneity of the articles meeting the inclusion criteria, as well as suggestions from an Expert Advisory Panel Meeting held on October 5, 2009, the inclusion criteria were revised to examine the effectiveness of cardiac MRI for the detection of CAD. Inclusion CriteriaExclusion CriteriaHeath technology assessments, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, observational studies≥20 adult patients enrolled.Published 2004-2009Licensed by Health CanadaFor diagnosis of CAD:Reference standard is coronary angiographySignificant CAD defined as ≥ 50% coronary stenosisPatients with suspected or known CADReported results by patient, not segmentNon-English studiesGrey literaturePlanar imagingMUGAPatients with recent MI (i.e., within 1 month)Patients with non-ischemic heart diseaseStudies done exclusively in special populations (e.g., women, diabetics) OUTCOMES OF INTEREST: Sensitivity and specificityArea under the curve (AUC)Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: Stress cardiac MRI using perfusion analysis yielded a pooled sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89 to 0.92) and specificity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76 to 0.82) for the detection of CAD.Stress cardiac MRI using wall motion analysis yielded a pooled sensitivity of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77 to 0.84) and specificity of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.81 to 0.89) for the detection of CAD.Based on DORs, there was no significant difference between pooled stress cardiac MRI using perfusion analysis and pooled stress cardiac MRI using wall motion analysis (P=0.26) for the detection of CAD.Pooled subgroup analysis of stress cardiac MRI using perfusion analysis showed no significant difference in the DORs between 1.5T and 3T MRI (P=0.72) for the detection of CAD.One study (N=60) was identified that examined stress cardiac MRI using wall motion analysis with a 3T MRI. The sensitivity and specificity of 3T MRI were 0.64 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.81) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.89 to 1.00), respectively, for the detection of CAD.The effectiveness of stress cardiac MRI for the detection of CAD in unstable patients with acute coronary syndrome was reported in only one study (N=35). Using perfusion analysis, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.87) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.54 to 1.00), respectively, for the detection of CAD. ONTARIO HEALTH SYSTEM IMPACT ANALYSIS: According to an expert consultant, in Ontario: Stress first pass perfusion is currently performed in small numbers in London (London Health Sciences Centre) and Toronto (University Health Network at the Toronto General Hospital site and Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre).Stress wall motion is only performed as part of research protocols and not very often.Cardiac MRI machines use 1.5T almost exclusively, with 3T used in research for first pass perfusion.On November 25 2009, the Cardiac Imaging Expert Advisory Panel met and made the following comments about stress cardiac MRI for perfusion analysis: Accessibility to cardiac MRI is limited and generally used to assess structural abnormalities. Most MRIs in Ontario are already in 24-hour, constant use and it would thus be difficult to add cardiac MRI for CAD diagnosis as an additional indication.The performance of cardiac MRI for the diagnosis of CAD can be technically challenging. GRADE QUALITY OF EVIDENCE FOR CARDIAC MRI IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF CAD: The quality of the body of evidence was assessed according to the GRADE Working Group criteria for diagnostic tests. For perfusion analysis, the overall quality was determined to be low and for wall motion analysis the overall quality was very low.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0100.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207