Comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the assessment of myocardial viability: meta-analysis and systematic review.

Abstract

Contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance (Ce-CMR) and Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) are frequently utilized in clinical practice to assess myocardial viability. However, studies evaluating direct comparison between Ce-CMR and FDG-PET have a smaller sample size, and no clear distinction between the two imaging modalities has been defined. To address this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of studies comparing Ce-CMR and FDG-PET for the assessment of myocardial viability. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from their inception to 4/20/2022 with search terms "viability" AND "heart diseases" AND "cardiac magnetic resonance imaging" AND "positron-emission tomography." We extracted patient characteristics, segment level viability assessment according to Ce-CMR and FDG-PET, and change in regional wall motion abnormalities (RWMA) at follow-up. We included four studies in the meta-analysis which provided viability assessment with Ce-CMR and FDG-PET in all patients and change in RWMA at follow-up. There were 82 patients among the four included studies, and 585 segments were compared for viability assessment. There were 59 (72%) males, and mean age was 65 years. The sensitivity (95% confidence interval-CI) and specificity (CI) of Ce-CMR for predicting myocardial recovery were 0.88 (0.66-0.96) and 0.64 (0.49-0.77), respectively. The sensitivity (CI) and specificity (CI) of FDG-PET for predicting myocardial recovery were 0.91 (0.63-0.99) and 0.67 (0.49-0.81), respectively. FDG-PET and Ce-CMR have comparable diagnostic parameters in myocardial viability assessment and are consistent with prior research.