...
首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet >Non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis.
【24h】

Non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography in the diagnosis of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis.

机译:非侵入性影像学与动脉内血管造影术相比对有症状颈动脉狭窄的诊断:一项荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Accurate carotid imaging is important for effective secondary stroke prevention. Non-invasive imaging, now widely available, is replacing intra-arterial angiography for carotid stenosis, but the accuracy remains uncertain despite an extensive literature. We systematically reviewed the accuracy of non-invasive imaging compared with intra-arterial angiography for diagnosing carotid stenosis in patients with carotid territory ischaemic symptoms. METHODS: We searched for articles published between 1980 and April 2004; included studies comparing non-invasive imaging with intra-arterial angiography that met Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) criteria; extracted data to calculate sensitivity and specificity of non-invasive imaging, to test for heterogeneity and to perform sensitivity analyses; and categorised percent stenosis by the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) method. RESULTS: In 41 included studies (2541 patients, 4876 arteries), contrast-enhanced MR angiography was more sensitive (0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.97) and specific (0.93, 95% CI 0.89-0.96) for 70-99% stenosis than Doppler ultrasound, MR angiography, and CT angiography (sensitivities 0.89, 0.88, 0.76; specificities 0.84, 0.84, 0.94, respectively). Data for 50-69% stenoses and combinations of non-invasive tests were sparse and unreliable. There was heterogeneity between studies and evidence of publication bias. INTERPRETATION: Non-invasive tests, used cautiously, could replace intra-arterial carotid angiography for 70-99% stenosis. However, more data are required to determine their accuracy, especially at 50-69% stenoses where the balance of risk and benefit for carotid endarterectomy is particularly narrow, and to explore and overcome heterogeneity. Methodology for evaluating imaging tests should be improved; blinded, prospective studies in clinically relevant patients are essential basic characteristics.
机译:背景:准确的颈动脉成像对有效预防继发性中风很重要。目前已广泛使用的非侵入性成像正在取代颈动脉狭窄的动脉内血管造影,但尽管文献广泛,但准确性仍不确定。我们系统地回顾了非侵入性成像与动脉内血管造影相比在诊断具有颈动脉区域缺血症状的患者中的颈动脉狭窄的准确性。方法:我们检索了1980年至2004年4月之间发表的文章;包括将符合诊断准确度报告(STARD)标准的无创成像与动脉内血管造影进行比较的研究;提取数据以计算非侵入性成像的敏感性和特异性,测试异质性并进行敏感性分析;根据北美有症状颈动脉内膜切除术(NASCET)方法对狭窄百分比进行分类。结果:在41项纳入研究(2541例患者,4876条动脉)中,对比增强MR血管造影对70-99%狭窄的敏感性更高(0.94,95%CI 0.88-0.97),特异性更高(0.93,95%CI 0.89-0.96)。与多普勒超声,MR血管造影和CT血管造影相比(敏感性分别为0.89、0.88、0.76;特异性0.84、0.84、0.94)。 50-69%狭窄和无创检查组合的数据稀疏且不可靠。研究与发表偏倚的证据之间存在异质性。解释:谨慎使用的非侵入性检查可以代替颈内动脉血管造影以治疗70-99%的狭窄。但是,需要更多的数据来确定其准确性,尤其是在狭窄程度为50-69%的狭窄患者中,颈动脉内膜切除术的风险和收益之间的平衡特别狭窄,并探索和克服异质性。评价影像学检查的方法应予以改进;临床相关患者的双盲,前瞻性研究是基本的基本特征。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号