Aline Iskandar

Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac positron emission tomography versus single photon emission computed tomography for coronary artery disease: a bivariate meta-analysis.

Background—Positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) offers technical benefits compared with single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) MPI, but there has been no systematic comparison of their diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease. We performed a bivariate meta-analysis of the published literature to compare the sensitivity and specificity of PET versus SPECT stress MPI for ≥50% stenosis of any epicardial coronary artery in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Methods and Results—We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception through January 2012 and the references of identified studies for prospective, English language studies that evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of PET and/or SPECT MPI with coronary angiography as the reference standard and reported sufficient data to calculate patient-level true and false positives and negatives. Two investigators independently extracted patient and study characteristics; a third investigator resolved any disagreements. We identified 117 studies, including 108 evaluating SPECT MPI, 4 evaluating PET MPI, and 5 evaluating both modalities. Bivariate meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly higher pooled mean sensitivity with PET (92.6% [95% Confidence Interval, 88.3% to 95.5%]) compared with SPECT (88.3% [95% confidence interval, 86.4% to 90.0%]) (P=0.035). No significant difference in specificity was observed between PET (81.3% [95% confidence interval, 66.6% to 90.4%]) and SPECT (75.8% [95% confidence interval, 72.1% to 79.1%]) (P=0.39). Few studies investigated coronary angiography with PET. Only 5 studies directly compared SPECT and PET. Conclusions—In a meta-analysis of 11,862 patients, PET MPI demonstrated a higher sensitivity for coronary artery disease than SPECT MPI. No difference in specificity was detected in the pooled analysis of PET and SPECT MPI.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiac Positron Emission Tomography Versus Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography for Coronary Artery DiseaseClinical Perspective

Background—Positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) offers technical benefits compared with single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) MPI, but there has been no systematic comparison of their diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease. We performed a bivariate meta-analysis of the published literature to compare the sensitivity and specificity of PET versus SPECT stress MPI for ≥50% stenosis of any epicardial coronary artery in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Methods and Results—We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception through January 2012 and the references of identified studies for prospective, English language studies that evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of PET and/or SPECT MPI with coronary angiography as the reference standard and reported sufficient data to calculate patient-level true and false positives and negatives. Two investigators independently extracted patient and study characteristics; a third investigator resolved any disagreements. We identified 117 studies, including 108 evaluating SPECT MPI, 4 evaluating PET MPI, and 5 evaluating both modalities. Bivariate meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly higher pooled mean sensitivity with PET (92.6% [95% Confidence Interval, 88.3% to 95.5%]) compared with SPECT (88.3% [95% confidence interval, 86.4% to 90.0%]) (P=0.035). No significant difference in specificity was observed between PET (81.3% [95% confidence interval, 66.6% to 90.4%]) and SPECT (75.8% [95% confidence interval, 72.1% to 79.1%]) (P=0.39). Few studies investigated coronary angiography with PET. Only 5 studies directly compared SPECT and PET. Conclusions—In a meta-analysis of 11,862 patients, PET MPI demonstrated a higher sensitivity for coronary artery disease than SPECT MPI. No difference in specificity was detected in the pooled analysis of PET and SPECT MPI.

A Meta-Analysis of Aortic Root Size in Elite Athletes

Background— The aorta is exposed to hemodynamic stress during exercise, but whether or not the aorta is larger in athletes is not clear. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to examine whethere athletes demonstrate increased aortic root dimensions compared with nonathlete controls. Methods and Results— We searched MEDLINE and Scopus from inception through August 12, 2012, for English-language studies reporting the aortic root size in elite athletes. Two investigators independently extracted athlete and study characteristics. A multivariate linear mixed model was used to conduct meta-regression analyses. We identified 71 studies reporting aortic root dimensions in 8564 unique athletes, but only 23 of these studies met our criteria by reporting aortic root dimensions at the aortic valve annulus or sinus of Valsalva in elite athletes (n=5580). Athletes were compared directly with controls (n=727) in 13 studies. On meta-regression, the weighted mean aortic root diameter measured at the sinuses of Valsalva was 3.2 mm (P=0.02) larger in athletes than in the nonathletic controls, whereas aortic root size at the aortic valve annulus was 1.6 mm (P=0.04) greater in athletes than in controls. Conclusions— Elite athletes have a small but significantly larger aortic root diameter at the sinuses of Valsalva and aortic valve annulus, but this difference is minor and clinically insignificant. Clinicians evaluating athletes should know that marked aortic root dilatation likely represents a pathological process and not a physiological adaptation to exercise.

Diseases of the Aorta in Elite Athletes.

Sudden cardiovascular deaths in athletes are rare and only a fraction are due to aortic events. There has been concern that the hemodynamic load during exercise may lead to aortic dilation, but aortic dimensions in endurance and strength-trained athletes are only slightly larger than those in sedentary comparison subjects. The presence of a bicuspid aortic valve without significant valvular dysfunction and normal aortic dimensions should not influence eligibility to practice sport. Patients with genetic syndromes associated with aortopathy generally should be restricted from vigorous sports participation. This article reviews the diagnosis and management of diseases of the aorta in athletes.

REDUCED GLOBAL LONGITUDINAL STRAIN IN APICAL (‘TAKOTSUBO’) STRESS CARDIOMYOPATHY: IMPLICATIONS FOR DIASTOLIC FILLING AND ASSESSMENT OF FILLING PRESSURES BY E/E’ RATIO

Background: Severe elevation in filling pressures is common among patients with stress cardiomyopathy (SCM), regardless of whether it is the apical (‘Takotsubo’ --T-SCM) or apical sparing (‘reverse Takotsubo’--rT-SCM) phenotype. Moreover, E/e’ reliably predicts LVEDP in T-SCM, but underestimates LVEDP in pts with rT-SCM. We hypothesized that the unreliability of E/e’ in rT-SCM might be related to less global myocardial dysfunction in rT-SCM and that such differences global dysfunction would be reflected by global longitudinal strain (GLS, %).

QT INTERVAL IN ELITE ATHLETES

Athletes Heart is the constellation of cardiac adaptations to exercise training. Some experts have suggested that exercise training may increase the QT interval and increase the risk of ventricular arrhythmia in athletes. We performed a meta-analysis to determine if these physiological changes lead

COMPARATIVE ACCURACY OF POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND SINGLE-PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: A META-ANALYSIS

Positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) offers technical benefits over single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) MPI, but there has been no systematic evaluation of their comparative diagnostic accuracy. To compare the sensitivity and specificity of PET versus

Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiac Positron Emission Tomography Versus Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography for Coronary Artery DiseaseClinical Perspective: A Bivariate Meta-Analysis

Background—Positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) offers technical benefits compared with single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) MPI, but there has been no systematic comparison of their diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease. We performed a bivariate meta-analysis of the published literature to compare the sensitivity and specificity of PET versus SPECT stress MPI for ≥50% stenosis of any epicardial coronary artery in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Methods and Results—We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception through January 2012 and the references of identified studies for prospective, English language studies that evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of PET and/or SPECT MPI with coronary angiography as the reference standard and reported sufficient data to calculate patient-level true and false positives and negatives. Two investigators independently extracted patient and study characteristics; a third investigator resolved any disagreements. We identified 117 studies, including 108 evaluating SPECT MPI, 4 evaluating PET MPI, and 5 evaluating both modalities. Bivariate meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly higher pooled mean sensitivity with PET (92.6% [95% Confidence Interval, 88.3% to 95.5%]) compared with SPECT (88.3% [95% confidence interval, 86.4% to 90.0%]) (P=0.035). No significant difference in specificity was observed between PET (81.3% [95% confidence interval, 66.6% to 90.4%]) and SPECT (75.8% [95% confidence interval, 72.1% to 79.1%]) (P=0.39). Few studies investigated coronary angiography with PET. Only 5 studies directly compared SPECT and PET. Conclusions—In a meta-analysis of 11,862 patients, PET MPI demonstrated a higher sensitivity for coronary artery disease than SPECT MPI. No difference in specificity was detected in the pooled analysis of PET and SPECT MPI.