Diagnostic Performance of Stress Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Coronary Artery DiseaseA Meta-Analysis
Kiran R. Nandalur, MD*,*,
Ben A. Dwamena, MD*, ,
Asim F. Choudhri, MD ,
Mohan R. Nandalur, MD and
Ruth C. Carlos, MD, MS*
* Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Veterans Affairs, Ann Arbor Health Care System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Department of Radiology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Georgetown University/Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 2 Forest Plot of Sensitivity and Specificity
(A, B) Forest plot of patient-level sensitivity and specificity of stress perfusion imaging compared with coronary angiography. (C, D) Forest plot of patient level sensitivity and specificity of stress-induced wall motion abnormalities imaging compared with coronary angiography. Solid squares = point estimate of each study (area indicates relative contribution of the study to meta-analysis); horizontal lines = 95% confidence interval (CI).
|
|
View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 3 Plot of Conditional Probabilities for PI and IWMA
Post-test probabilities are shown as a function of pretest probability for patients with positive results on perfusion imaging (PI), positive results on wall motion abnormalities imaging (IWMA), negative results on PI, and negative results on IWMA.
|
|
|
