Abstract

Background There is no consensus regarding the relative prognostic value of cardiac MRI and fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET in cardiac sarcoidosis. Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prognostic value of cardiac MRI and FDG PET for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in cardiac sarcoidosis. Materials and Methods In this systematic review, MEDLINE, Ovid Epub, CENTRAL, Embase, Emcare, and Scopus were searched from inception until January 2022. Studies that evaluated the prognostic value of cardiac MRI or FDG PET in adults with cardiac sarcoidosis were included. The primary outcome of MACE was assessed as a composite including death, ventricular arrhythmia, and heart failure hospitalization. Summary metrics were obtained using random-effects meta-analysis. Meta-regression was used to assess covariates. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies, or QUIPS, tool. Results Thirty-seven studies were included (3489 patients with mean follow-up of 3.1 years ± 1.5 [SD]); 29 studies evaluated MRI (2931 patients) and 17 evaluated FDG PET (1243 patients). Five studies directly compared MRI and PET in the same patients (276 patients). Left ventricular late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) at MRI and FDG uptake at PET were both predictive of MACE (odds ratio [OR], 8.0 [95% CI: 4.3, 15.0] [P < .001] and 2.1 [95% CI: 1.4, 3.2] [P < .001], respectively). At meta-regression, results varied by modality (P = .006). LGE (OR, 10.4 [95% CI: 3.5, 30.5]; P < .001) was also predictive of MACE when restricted to studies with direct comparison, whereas FDG uptake (OR, 1.9 [95% CI: 0.82, 4.4]; P = .13) was not. Right ventricular LGE and FDG uptake were also associated with MACE (OR, 13.1 [95% CI: 5.2, 33] [P < .001] and 4.1 [95% CI: 1.9, 8.9] [P < .001], respectively). Thirty-two studies were at risk for bias. Conclusion Left and right ventricular late gadolinium enhancement at cardiac MRI and fluorodeoxyglucose uptake at PET were predictive of major adverse cardiac events in cardiac sarcoidosis. Limitations include few studies with direct comparison and risk of bias. Systematic review registration no. CRD42021214776 (PROSPERO) © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.