This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (15)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Cardiovascular System  • Evidence-Based Medicine  • Review  • Computed Tomography  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging  • Cardiac Diagnostic Tests  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Toshiya Shiga, MD, PhD; Zen’ichiro Wajima, MD, PhD; Christian C. Apfel, MD, PhD; Tetsuo Inoue, MD, PhD; Yoko Ohe, MD, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:1350-1356.

Background  Patients with suspected thoracic aortic dissection require early and accurate diagnosis. Aortography has been replaced by less invasive imaging techniques including transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), helical computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); however, accuracies have varied from trial to trial, and which imaging technique should be applied to which risk population remains unclear. We systematically reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of these imaging techniques in patients with suspected thoracic aortic dissection.

Methods  Published English-language reports on the diagnosis of thoracic aortic dissection by TEE, helical CT, or MRI were identified from electronic databases. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were pooled in a random-effects model.

Results  Sixteen studies involving a total of 1139 patients were selected. Pooled sensitivity (98%-100%) and specificity (95%-98%) were comparable between imaging techniques. The pooled positive likelihood ratio appeared to be higher for MRI (positive likelihood ratio, 25.3; 95% confidence interval, 11.1-57.1) than for TEE (14.1; 6.0-33.2) or helical CT (13.9; 4.2-46.0). If a patient had shown a 50% pretest probability of thoracic aortic dissection (high risk), he or she had a 93% to 96% posttest probability of thoracic aortic dissection following a positive result of each imaging test. If a patient had a 5% pretest probability of thoracic aortic dissection (low risk), he or she had a 0.1% to 0.3% posttest probability of thoracic aortic dissection following a negative result of each imaging test.

Conclusion  All 3 imaging techniques, ie, TEE, helical CT, and MRI, yield clinically equally reliable diagnostic values for confirming or ruling out thoracic aortic dissection.

Author Affiliations: Department of Anesthesiology, Toho University Ohashi Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan (Drs Shiga and Ohe); Department of Anesthesia, Nippon Medical School Chiba Hokusoh Hospital, Chiba, Japan (Drs Wajima and Inoue); and Department of Anesthesia and Preoperative Care, University of California at San Francisco (Dr Apfel).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Accuracy and Cost Comparison of Ultrasound Versus Alternative Imaging Modalities, Including CT, MR, PET, and Angiography
Bierig and Jones
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography 2009;25:138-144.
ABSTRACT  

Echocardiography in the emergency assessment of acute aortic syndromes
Meredith and Masani
Eur J Echocardiogr 2009;10:i31-i39.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Identification by transesophageal echocardiography of intramural hematoma and the site of aortic rupture.
Orihashi et al.
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2008;136:1089-1091.
FULL TEXT