Heart failure & cardiomyopathiesMeta-analysis
Cardiac Computed Tomography for Quantification of Myocardial Extracellular Volume Fraction
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
- random-effects
Authors' conclusion
CT-derived ECV showed an excellent correlation and mean difference of <1% with CMR-derived ECV.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with myocardial extracellular volume (ECV) quantified by both computed tomography (CT) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)
- Participants
- 383 patients · 13 studies
- Comparison
- CT-derived ECV vs CMR-derived ECV
- Outcome
- Correlation and agreement (mean difference) of myocardial ECV by CT vs CMR
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Each group vs CMRPooled mean difference, % (95% CI)
CT
0.96(0.14%–1.78%)
- CT
- mean correlation 0.90 (95% CI 0.86–0.95)
Further pooled results
Mean
| Outcome | DECT | SECT | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Correlation, DECT vs SECT (subgroup) · correlation significantly higher with DECT | 0.94 (95% CI 0.91–0.98) | 0.87 (95% CI 0.80–0.94) | P = 0.01 |
- Correlation, dual-energy CT (DECT) vs single-energy CT (SECT) (subgroup): 7 studies SECT, 4 studies DECT
Mean difference, SECT vs DECT (subgroup)
- No significant difference in pooled mean differences between SECT and DECT
- P = 0.85
Original publication
Cardiac Computed Tomography for Quantification of Myocardial Extracellular Volume Fraction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. Published 31 May 2023. doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2023.03.021
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it