Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Identifieur interne : 000146 ( Pmc/Corpus ); précédent : 000145; suivant : 000147Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Auteurs : Marcus C. De Jong ; Tessa S. S. Genders ; Robert-Jan Van Geuns ; Adriaan Moelker ; M. G. Myriam HuninkSource :
- European Radiology [ 0938-7994 ] ; 2012.
Abstract
To determine and compare the diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), using conventional coronary angiography (CCA) as the reference standard.
We searched Medline and Embase for literature that evaluated stress MPI for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), contrast-enhanced echocardiography (ECHO), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET).
All pooled analyses were based on random effects models. Articles on MRI yielded a total of 2,970 patients from 28 studies, articles on ECHO yielded a sample size of 795 from 10 studies, articles on SPECT yielded 1,323 from 13 studies. For CAD defined as either at least 50 %, at least 70 % or at least 75 % lumen diameter reduction on CCA, the natural logarithms of the diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR) for MRI (3.63; 95 % CI 3.26–4.00) was significantly higher compared to that of SPECT (2.76; 95 % CI 2.28–3.25;
Our results suggest that MRI is superior for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD compared with ECHO and SPECT. ECHO and SPECT demonstrated similar diagnostic performance.
•
•
•
•
•
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-012-2434-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Url:
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2434-1
PubMed: 22527375
PubMed Central: 3411304
Links to Exploration step
PMC:3411304Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author><name sortKey="De Jong, Marcus C" sort="De Jong, Marcus C" uniqKey="De Jong M" first="Marcus C." last="De Jong">Marcus C. De Jong</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1">Departments of Epidemiology and Radiology, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Genders, Tessa S S" sort="Genders, Tessa S S" uniqKey="Genders T" first="Tessa S. S." last="Genders">Tessa S. S. Genders</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1">Departments of Epidemiology and Radiology, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Geuns, Robert Jan" sort="Van Geuns, Robert Jan" uniqKey="Van Geuns R" first="Robert-Jan" last="Van Geuns">Robert-Jan Van Geuns</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff3">Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Moelker, Adriaan" sort="Moelker, Adriaan" uniqKey="Moelker A" first="Adriaan" last="Moelker">Adriaan Moelker</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hunink, M G Myriam" sort="Hunink, M G Myriam" uniqKey="Hunink M" first="M. G. Myriam" last="Hunink">M. G. Myriam Hunink</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1">Departments of Epidemiology and Radiology, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff4">Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, USA</nlm:aff></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno><idno type="pmid">22527375</idno><idno type="pmc">3411304</idno><idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3411304</idno><idno type="RBID">PMC:3411304</idno><idno type="doi">10.1007/s00330-012-2434-1</idno><date when="2012">2012</date><idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">000146</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author><name sortKey="De Jong, Marcus C" sort="De Jong, Marcus C" uniqKey="De Jong M" first="Marcus C." last="De Jong">Marcus C. De Jong</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1">Departments of Epidemiology and Radiology, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Genders, Tessa S S" sort="Genders, Tessa S S" uniqKey="Genders T" first="Tessa S. S." last="Genders">Tessa S. S. Genders</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1">Departments of Epidemiology and Radiology, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Van Geuns, Robert Jan" sort="Van Geuns, Robert Jan" uniqKey="Van Geuns R" first="Robert-Jan" last="Van Geuns">Robert-Jan Van Geuns</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff3">Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Moelker, Adriaan" sort="Moelker, Adriaan" uniqKey="Moelker A" first="Adriaan" last="Moelker">Adriaan Moelker</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hunink, M G Myriam" sort="Hunink, M G Myriam" uniqKey="Hunink M" first="M. G. Myriam" last="Hunink">M. G. Myriam Hunink</name><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff1">Departments of Epidemiology and Radiology, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff2">Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</nlm:aff></affiliation><affiliation><nlm:aff id="Aff4">Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, USA</nlm:aff></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j">European Radiology</title><idno type="ISSN">0938-7994</idno><idno type="eISSN">1432-1084</idno><imprint><date when="2012">2012</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><sec><title>Objectives</title><p>To determine and compare the diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), using conventional coronary angiography (CCA) as the reference standard.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>We searched Medline and Embase for literature that evaluated stress MPI for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), contrast-enhanced echocardiography (ECHO), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET).</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>All pooled analyses were based on random effects models. Articles on MRI yielded a total of 2,970 patients from 28 studies, articles on ECHO yielded a sample size of 795 from 10 studies, articles on SPECT yielded 1,323 from 13 studies. For CAD defined as either at least 50 %, at least 70 % or at least 75 % lumen diameter reduction on CCA, the natural logarithms of the diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR) for MRI (3.63; 95 % CI 3.26–4.00) was significantly higher compared to that of SPECT (2.76; 95 % CI 2.28–3.25; <italic>P</italic> = 0.006) and that of ECHO (2.83; 95 % CI 2.29–3.37; <italic>P</italic> = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the lnDOR of SPECT and ECHO (<italic>P</italic> = 0.52).</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>Our results suggest that MRI is superior for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD compared with ECHO and SPECT. ECHO and SPECT demonstrated similar diagnostic performance.</p></sec><sec><title>Key Points</title><p>• <italic>MRI can assess myocardial perfusion</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>MR perfusion diagnoses coronary artery disease better than echocardiography or SPECT</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>Echocardiography and SPECT have similar diagnostic performance</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>MRI can save coronary artery disease patients from more invasive tests</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>MRI and SPECT show evidence of publication bias, implying possible overestimation</italic>.</p></sec><sec><title>Electronic supplementary material</title><p>The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-012-2434-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.</p></sec></div></front><back><div1 type="bibliography"><listBibl><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Murray, Cj" uniqKey="Murray C">CJ Murray</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lopez, Ad" uniqKey="Lopez A">AD Lopez</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kwok, Y" uniqKey="Kwok Y">Y Kwok</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kim, C" uniqKey="Kim C">C Kim</name></author><author><name sortKey="Grady, D" uniqKey="Grady D">D Grady</name></author><author><name sortKey="Segal, M" uniqKey="Segal M">M Segal</name></author><author><name sortKey="Redberg, R" uniqKey="Redberg R">R Redberg</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Noto, Tj" uniqKey="Noto T">TJ Noto</name></author><author><name sortKey="Johnson, Lw" uniqKey="Johnson L">LW Johnson</name></author><author><name sortKey="Krone, R" uniqKey="Krone R">R Krone</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Scanlon, Pj" uniqKey="Scanlon P">PJ Scanlon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Faxon, Dp" uniqKey="Faxon D">DP Faxon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Audet, Am" uniqKey="Audet A">AM Audet</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Schwitter, J" uniqKey="Schwitter J">J Schwitter</name></author><author><name sortKey="Wacker, Cm" uniqKey="Wacker C">CM Wacker</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rossum, Ac" uniqKey="Rossum A">AC Rossum</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Nandalur, Kr" uniqKey="Nandalur K">KR Nandalur</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dwamena, Ba" uniqKey="Dwamena B">BA Dwamena</name></author><author><name sortKey="Choudhri, Af" uniqKey="Choudhri A">AF Choudhri</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nandalur, Sr" uniqKey="Nandalur S">SR Nandalur</name></author><author><name sortKey="Reddy, P" uniqKey="Reddy P">P Reddy</name></author><author><name sortKey="Carlos, Rc" uniqKey="Carlos R">RC Carlos</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Nandalur, Kr" uniqKey="Nandalur K">KR Nandalur</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dwamena, Ba" uniqKey="Dwamena B">BA Dwamena</name></author><author><name sortKey="Choudhri, Af" uniqKey="Choudhri A">AF Choudhri</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nandalur, Mr" uniqKey="Nandalur M">MR Nandalur</name></author><author><name sortKey="Carlos, Rc" uniqKey="Carlos R">RC Carlos</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Abdelmoneim, Ss" uniqKey="Abdelmoneim S">SS Abdelmoneim</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dhoble, A" uniqKey="Dhoble A">A Dhoble</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bernier, M" uniqKey="Bernier M">M Bernier</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Underwood, Sr" uniqKey="Underwood S">SR Underwood</name></author><author><name sortKey="Anagnostopoulos, C" uniqKey="Anagnostopoulos C">C Anagnostopoulos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Cerqueira, M" uniqKey="Cerqueira M">M Cerqueira</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hamon, M" uniqKey="Hamon M">M Hamon</name></author><author><name sortKey="Fau, G" uniqKey="Fau G">G Fau</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nee, G" uniqKey="Nee G">G Nee</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ehtisham, J" uniqKey="Ehtisham J">J Ehtisham</name></author><author><name sortKey="Morello, R" uniqKey="Morello R">R Morello</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Moher, D" uniqKey="Moher D">D Moher</name></author><author><name sortKey="Liberati, A" uniqKey="Liberati A">A Liberati</name></author><author><name sortKey="Tetzlaff, J" uniqKey="Tetzlaff J">J Tetzlaff</name></author><author><name sortKey="Altman, Dg" uniqKey="Altman D">DG Altman</name></author><author><name sortKey="Group, P" uniqKey="Group P">P Group</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Liberati, A" uniqKey="Liberati A">A Liberati</name></author><author><name sortKey="Altman, Dg" uniqKey="Altman D">DG Altman</name></author><author><name sortKey="Tetzlaff, J" uniqKey="Tetzlaff J">J Tetzlaff</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Heijenbrok Kal, Mh" uniqKey="Heijenbrok Kal M">MH Heijenbrok-Kal</name></author><author><name sortKey="Fleischmann, Ke" uniqKey="Fleischmann K">KE Fleischmann</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hunink, Mg" uniqKey="Hunink M">MG Hunink</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Whiting, P" uniqKey="Whiting P">P Whiting</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rutjes, Aw" uniqKey="Rutjes A">AW Rutjes</name></author><author><name sortKey="Reitsma, Jb" uniqKey="Reitsma J">JB Reitsma</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bossuyt, Pm" uniqKey="Bossuyt P">PM Bossuyt</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kleijnen, J" uniqKey="Kleijnen J">J Kleijnen</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Arends, Lr" uniqKey="Arends L">LR Arends</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hamza, Th" uniqKey="Hamza T">TH Hamza</name></author><author><name sortKey="Houwelingen, Jc" uniqKey="Houwelingen J">JC Houwelingen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Heijenbrok Kal, Mh" uniqKey="Heijenbrok Kal M">MH Heijenbrok-Kal</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hunink, Mg" uniqKey="Hunink M">MG Hunink</name></author><author><name sortKey="Stijnen, T" uniqKey="Stijnen T">T Stijnen</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Knottnerus, Ja" uniqKey="Knottnerus J">JA Knottnerus</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Schuetz, Gm" uniqKey="Schuetz G">GM Schuetz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Zacharopoulou, Nm" uniqKey="Zacharopoulou N">NM Zacharopoulou</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schlattmann, P" uniqKey="Schlattmann P">P Schlattmann</name></author><author><name sortKey="Dewey, M" uniqKey="Dewey M">M Dewey</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Einstein, Aj" uniqKey="Einstein A">AJ Einstein</name></author><author><name sortKey="Henzlova, Mj" uniqKey="Henzlova M">MJ Henzlova</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rajagopalan, S" uniqKey="Rajagopalan S">S Rajagopalan</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Jaeschke, R" uniqKey="Jaeschke R">R Jaeschke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Guyatt, Gh" uniqKey="Guyatt G">GH Guyatt</name></author><author><name sortKey="Sackett, Dl" uniqKey="Sackett D">DL Sackett</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Bruder, O" uniqKey="Bruder O">O Bruder</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schneider, S" uniqKey="Schneider S">S Schneider</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nothnagel, D" uniqKey="Nothnagel D">D Nothnagel</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Arnold, Jr" uniqKey="Arnold J">JR Arnold</name></author><author><name sortKey="Karamitsos, Td" uniqKey="Karamitsos T">TD Karamitsos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pegg, Tj" uniqKey="Pegg T">TJ Pegg</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Bernhardt, P" uniqKey="Bernhardt P">P Bernhardt</name></author><author><name sortKey="Spiess, J" uniqKey="Spiess J">J Spiess</name></author><author><name sortKey="Levenson, B" uniqKey="Levenson B">B Levenson</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Cheng, As" uniqKey="Cheng A">AS Cheng</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pegg, Tj" uniqKey="Pegg T">TJ Pegg</name></author><author><name sortKey="Karamitsos, Td" uniqKey="Karamitsos T">TD Karamitsos</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Cury, Rc" uniqKey="Cury R">RC Cury</name></author><author><name sortKey="Cattani, Ca" uniqKey="Cattani C">CA Cattani</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gabure, La" uniqKey="Gabure L">LA Gabure</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Donati, Of" uniqKey="Donati O">OF Donati</name></author><author><name sortKey="Scheffel, H" uniqKey="Scheffel H">H Scheffel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Stolzmann, P" uniqKey="Stolzmann P">P Stolzmann</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Doyle, M" uniqKey="Doyle M">M Doyle</name></author><author><name sortKey="Fuisz, A" uniqKey="Fuisz A">A Fuisz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kortright, E" uniqKey="Kortright E">E Kortright</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gebker, R" uniqKey="Gebker R">R Gebker</name></author><author><name sortKey="Jahnke, C" uniqKey="Jahnke C">C Jahnke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Paetsch, I" uniqKey="Paetsch I">I Paetsch</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gebker, R" uniqKey="Gebker R">R Gebker</name></author><author><name sortKey="Jahnke, C" uniqKey="Jahnke C">C Jahnke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Paetsch, I" uniqKey="Paetsch I">I Paetsch</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Giang, Th" uniqKey="Giang T">TH Giang</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nanz, D" uniqKey="Nanz D">D Nanz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Coulden, R" uniqKey="Coulden R">R Coulden</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kawase, Y" uniqKey="Kawase Y">Y Kawase</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nishimoto, M" uniqKey="Nishimoto M">M Nishimoto</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hato, K" uniqKey="Hato K">K Hato</name></author><author><name sortKey="Okajima, K" uniqKey="Okajima K">K Okajima</name></author><author><name sortKey="Yoshikawa, J" uniqKey="Yoshikawa J">J Yoshikawa</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kitagawa, K" uniqKey="Kitagawa K">K Kitagawa</name></author><author><name sortKey="Sakuma, H" uniqKey="Sakuma H">H Sakuma</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nagata, M" uniqKey="Nagata M">M Nagata</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Klein, C" uniqKey="Klein C">C Klein</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gebker, R" uniqKey="Gebker R">R Gebker</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kokocinski, T" uniqKey="Kokocinski T">T Kokocinski</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Klein, C" uniqKey="Klein C">C Klein</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nagel, E" uniqKey="Nagel E">E Nagel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gebker, R" uniqKey="Gebker R">R Gebker</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Klem, I" uniqKey="Klem I">I Klem</name></author><author><name sortKey="Heitner, Jf" uniqKey="Heitner J">JF Heitner</name></author><author><name sortKey="Shah, Dj" uniqKey="Shah D">DJ Shah</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Klumpp, Bd" uniqKey="Klumpp B">BD Klumpp</name></author><author><name sortKey="Seeger, A" uniqKey="Seeger A">A Seeger</name></author><author><name sortKey="Doesch, C" uniqKey="Doesch C">C Doesch</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Krittayaphong, R" uniqKey="Krittayaphong R">R Krittayaphong</name></author><author><name sortKey="Boonyasirinant, T" uniqKey="Boonyasirinant T">T Boonyasirinant</name></author><author><name sortKey="Saiviroonporn, P" uniqKey="Saiviroonporn P">P Saiviroonporn</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Merkle, N" uniqKey="Merkle N">N Merkle</name></author><author><name sortKey="Wohrle, J" uniqKey="Wohrle J">J Wohrle</name></author><author><name sortKey="Grebe, O" uniqKey="Grebe O">O Grebe</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Meyer, C" uniqKey="Meyer C">C Meyer</name></author><author><name sortKey="Strach, K" uniqKey="Strach K">K Strach</name></author><author><name sortKey="Thomas, D" uniqKey="Thomas D">D Thomas</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Nagel, E" uniqKey="Nagel E">E Nagel</name></author><author><name sortKey="Klein, C" uniqKey="Klein C">C Klein</name></author><author><name sortKey="Paetsch, I" uniqKey="Paetsch I">I Paetsch</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Paetsch, I" uniqKey="Paetsch I">I Paetsch</name></author><author><name sortKey="Jahnke, C" uniqKey="Jahnke C">C Jahnke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Wahl, A" uniqKey="Wahl A">A Wahl</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Pilz, G" uniqKey="Pilz G">G Pilz</name></author><author><name sortKey="Bernhardt, P" uniqKey="Bernhardt P">P Bernhardt</name></author><author><name sortKey="Klos, M" uniqKey="Klos M">M Klos</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ali, E" uniqKey="Ali E">E Ali</name></author><author><name sortKey="Wild, M" uniqKey="Wild M">M Wild</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hofling, B" uniqKey="Hofling B">B Hofling</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Pingitore, A" uniqKey="Pingitore A">A Pingitore</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lombardi, M" uniqKey="Lombardi M">M Lombardi</name></author><author><name sortKey="Scattini, B" uniqKey="Scattini B">B Scattini</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Plein, S" uniqKey="Plein S">S Plein</name></author><author><name sortKey="Radjenovic, A" uniqKey="Radjenovic A">A Radjenovic</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ridgway, Jp" uniqKey="Ridgway J">JP Ridgway</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Plein, S" uniqKey="Plein S">S Plein</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kozerke, S" uniqKey="Kozerke S">S Kozerke</name></author><author><name sortKey="Suerder, D" uniqKey="Suerder D">D Suerder</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Plein, S" uniqKey="Plein S">S Plein</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schwitter, J" uniqKey="Schwitter J">J Schwitter</name></author><author><name sortKey="Suerder, D" uniqKey="Suerder D">D Suerder</name></author><author><name sortKey="Greenwood, Jp" uniqKey="Greenwood J">JP Greenwood</name></author><author><name sortKey="Boesiger, P" uniqKey="Boesiger P">P Boesiger</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kozerke, S" uniqKey="Kozerke S">S Kozerke</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Stolzmann, P" uniqKey="Stolzmann P">P Stolzmann</name></author><author><name sortKey="Alkadhi, H" uniqKey="Alkadhi H">H Alkadhi</name></author><author><name sortKey="Scheffel, H" uniqKey="Scheffel H">H Scheffel</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Takase, B" uniqKey="Takase B">B Takase</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nagata, M" uniqKey="Nagata M">M Nagata</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kihara, T" uniqKey="Kihara T">T Kihara</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Aggeli, C" uniqKey="Aggeli C">C Aggeli</name></author><author><name sortKey="Christoforatou, E" uniqKey="Christoforatou E">E Christoforatou</name></author><author><name sortKey="Giannopoulos, G" uniqKey="Giannopoulos G">G Giannopoulos</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Chiou, Kr" uniqKey="Chiou K">KR Chiou</name></author><author><name sortKey="Huang, Wc" uniqKey="Huang W">WC Huang</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lin, Sl" uniqKey="Lin S">SL Lin</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Jeetley, P" uniqKey="Jeetley P">P Jeetley</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hickman, M" uniqKey="Hickman M">M Hickman</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kamp, O" uniqKey="Kamp O">O Kamp</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kowatsch, I" uniqKey="Kowatsch I">I Kowatsch</name></author><author><name sortKey="Tsutsui, Jm" uniqKey="Tsutsui J">JM Tsutsui</name></author><author><name sortKey="Osorio, Af" uniqKey="Osorio A">AF Osorio</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Lipiec, P" uniqKey="Lipiec P">P Lipiec</name></author><author><name sortKey="Wejner Mik, P" uniqKey="Wejner Mik P">P Wejner-Mik</name></author><author><name sortKey="Krzeminska Pakula, M" uniqKey="Krzeminska Pakula M">M Krzeminska-Pakula</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Miszalski Jamka, T" uniqKey="Miszalski Jamka T">T Miszalski-Jamka</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kuntz Hehner, S" uniqKey="Kuntz Hehner S">S Kuntz-Hehner</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schmidt, H" uniqKey="Schmidt H">H Schmidt</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Moir, S" uniqKey="Moir S">S Moir</name></author><author><name sortKey="Haluska, Ba" uniqKey="Haluska B">BA Haluska</name></author><author><name sortKey="Jenkins, C" uniqKey="Jenkins C">C Jenkins</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mcnab, D" uniqKey="Mcnab D">D McNab</name></author><author><name sortKey="Marwick, Th" uniqKey="Marwick T">TH Marwick</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Peltier, M" uniqKey="Peltier M">M Peltier</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vancraeynest, D" uniqKey="Vancraeynest D">D Vancraeynest</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pasquet, A" uniqKey="Pasquet A">A Pasquet</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Senior, R" uniqKey="Senior R">R Senior</name></author><author><name sortKey="Lepper, W" uniqKey="Lepper W">W Lepper</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pasquet, A" uniqKey="Pasquet A">A Pasquet</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Astarita, C" uniqKey="Astarita C">C Astarita</name></author><author><name sortKey="Palinkas, A" uniqKey="Palinkas A">A Palinkas</name></author><author><name sortKey="Nicolai, E" uniqKey="Nicolai E">E Nicolai</name></author><author><name sortKey="Maresca, Fs" uniqKey="Maresca F">FS Maresca</name></author><author><name sortKey="Varga, A" uniqKey="Varga A">A Varga</name></author><author><name sortKey="Picano, E" uniqKey="Picano E">E Picano</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Budoff, Mj" uniqKey="Budoff M">MJ Budoff</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rasouli, Ml" uniqKey="Rasouli M">ML Rasouli</name></author><author><name sortKey="Shavelle, Dm" uniqKey="Shavelle D">DM Shavelle</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gonzalez, P" uniqKey="Gonzalez P">P Gonzalez</name></author><author><name sortKey="Massardo, T" uniqKey="Massardo T">T Massardo</name></author><author><name sortKey="Jofre, Mj" uniqKey="Jofre M">MJ Jofre</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Johansen, A" uniqKey="Johansen A">A Johansen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hoilund Carlsen, Pf" uniqKey="Hoilund Carlsen P">PF Hoilund-Carlsen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Christensen, Hw" uniqKey="Christensen H">HW Christensen</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Schepis, T" uniqKey="Schepis T">T Schepis</name></author><author><name sortKey="Gaemperli, O" uniqKey="Gaemperli O">O Gaemperli</name></author><author><name sortKey="Koepfli, P" uniqKey="Koepfli P">P Koepfli</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Yao, Z" uniqKey="Yao Z">Z Yao</name></author><author><name sortKey="Liu, Xj" uniqKey="Liu X">XJ Liu</name></author><author><name sortKey="Shi, Rf" uniqKey="Shi R">RF Shi</name></author></analytic></biblStruct><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Yeih, Df" uniqKey="Yeih D">DF Yeih</name></author><author><name sortKey="Huang, Pj" uniqKey="Huang P">PJ Huang</name></author><author><name sortKey="Ho, Yl" uniqKey="Ho Y">YL Ho</name></author></analytic></biblStruct></listBibl></div1></back></TEI><pmc article-type="research-article"><pmc-dir>properties open_access</pmc-dir>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Eur Radiol</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">Eur Radiol</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>European Radiology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">0938-7994</issn><issn pub-type="epub">1432-1084</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Springer-Verlag</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Berlin/Heidelberg</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">22527375</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmc">3411304</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">2434</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00330-012-2434-1</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Cardiac</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>de Jong</surname><given-names>Marcus C.</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff2">2</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Genders</surname><given-names>Tessa S. S.</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff2">2</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>van Geuns</surname><given-names>Robert-Jan</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff2">2</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff3">3</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Moelker</surname><given-names>Adriaan</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff2">2</xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name><surname>Hunink</surname><given-names>M. G. Myriam</given-names></name><address><email>m.hunink@erasmusmc.nl</email></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff1">1</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff2">2</xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff4">4</xref></contrib><aff id="Aff1"><label>1</label>Departments of Epidemiology and Radiology, Erasmus MC – University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands</aff><aff id="Aff2"><label>2</label>Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</aff><aff id="Aff3"><label>3</label>Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands</aff><aff id="Aff4"><label>4</label>Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, USA</aff></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>19</day><month>4</month><year>2012</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="pmc-release"><day>19</day><month>4</month><year>2012</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>9</month><year>2012</year></pub-date><volume>22</volume><issue>9</issue><fpage>1881</fpage><lpage>1895</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>11</day><month>10</month><year>2011</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>23</day><month>1</month><year>2012</year></date><date date-type="accepted"><day>4</day><month>2</month><year>2012</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>© The Author(s) 2012</copyright-statement></permissions><abstract id="Abs1"><sec><title>Objectives</title><p>To determine and compare the diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), using conventional coronary angiography (CCA) as the reference standard.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>We searched Medline and Embase for literature that evaluated stress MPI for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), contrast-enhanced echocardiography (ECHO), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET).</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>All pooled analyses were based on random effects models. Articles on MRI yielded a total of 2,970 patients from 28 studies, articles on ECHO yielded a sample size of 795 from 10 studies, articles on SPECT yielded 1,323 from 13 studies. For CAD defined as either at least 50 %, at least 70 % or at least 75 % lumen diameter reduction on CCA, the natural logarithms of the diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR) for MRI (3.63; 95 % CI 3.26–4.00) was significantly higher compared to that of SPECT (2.76; 95 % CI 2.28–3.25; <italic>P</italic> = 0.006) and that of ECHO (2.83; 95 % CI 2.29–3.37; <italic>P</italic> = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the lnDOR of SPECT and ECHO (<italic>P</italic> = 0.52).</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusion</title><p>Our results suggest that MRI is superior for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD compared with ECHO and SPECT. ECHO and SPECT demonstrated similar diagnostic performance.</p></sec><sec><title>Key Points</title><p>• <italic>MRI can assess myocardial perfusion</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>MR perfusion diagnoses coronary artery disease better than echocardiography or SPECT</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>Echocardiography and SPECT have similar diagnostic performance</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>MRI can save coronary artery disease patients from more invasive tests</italic>.</p><p>• <italic>MRI and SPECT show evidence of publication bias, implying possible overestimation</italic>.</p></sec><sec><title>Electronic supplementary material</title><p>The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-012-2434-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.</p></sec></abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><title>Keywords</title><kwd>Myocardial perfusion imaging</kwd><kwd>Diagnostic performance</kwd><kwd>Systematic review</kwd><kwd>Meta-analysis</kwd><kwd>Coronary artery disease</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>issue-copyright-statement</meta-name><meta-value>© European Society of Radiology 2012</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="Sec1" sec-type="introduction"><title>Introduction</title><p>Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the major causes of mortality and morbidity throughout the world [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR1">1</xref>]. The initial assessment of a patient with chest pain usually consists of a stress ECG (electrocardiogram). However, its diagnostic accuracy is low [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR2">2</xref>] compared to conventional coronary angiography (CCA), which is the reference standard for diagnosing CAD. On the other hand, CCA is an invasive technique and carries a small risk of complications [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR3">3</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR4">4</xref>]. Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) is a non-invasive technique that is used clinically as a gatekeeper test before CCA.</p><p>MPI can be conducted using stress magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), contrast-enhanced echocardiography (ECHO), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET) and, under development, computed tomography (CT). The only available extensive study directly comparing two techniques is the MR-IMPACT study [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR5">5</xref>], a multicentre randomised trial which found that MRI is superior to SPECT. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been published for most of the techniques but none of these reviews compare MPI techniques [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR6">6</xref>–<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR10">10</xref>]. The comparability between these different meta-analyses is questionable mainly because of differences in publication period, searching the literature, selection of the evidence, and analysis of the data. Furthermore, studies with verification bias are often included in these reports which may have overestimated the sensitivity and underestimated the specificity of the tests considered. To overcome these problems a systematic review of different MPI techniques is required using the same selection criteria and methods of analysis for all techniques and excluding studies with (potential) verification bias, to make a fair comparison between these imaging tests.</p><p>The aim of this study was to determine and compare the diagnostic performance of stress MPI tests for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD, with conventional CCA as the reference standard. We performed the review according to the PRISMA statement for such reviews [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR11">11</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR12">12</xref>].</p></sec><sec id="Sec2" sec-type="materials|methods"><title>Materials and methods</title><sec id="Sec3"><title>Search strategy</title><p>We searched Medline and Embase for English-language literature published between January 2000 and May 2011 evaluating the presence of obstructive CAD by stress perfusion imaging tests, namely MRI, contrast-enhanced ECHO, SPECT and PET. In this meta-analysis we focus on functional imaging tests evaluating perfusion as a measure of haemodynamically significant myocardial ischaemia as opposed to anatomical imaging tests, such as coronary CT angiography, which evaluates structural abnormalities of the coronary arteries. We limited the search to publications from 2000 onwards to include only studies that evaluated state-of-the-art MPI techniques. This may have introduced a selection bias with respect to SPECT, because many SPECT studies were published before 2000. To deal with this problem we compare our results with a review of meta-analyses of SPECT studies by Heijenbrok-Kal et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR13">13</xref>]. CT was excluded because it is still being developed technically. Review articles were checked for potential additional studies. The search included keywords corresponding to the four index tests (MRI, ECHO, SPECT and PET), the reference test (CCA), the target condition (CAD) and diagnostic performance. We used numerous synonyms including both ‘text words’ and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms to maximise the sensitivity of our search. See Appendix A in the <xref rid="MOESM1" ref-type="media">Electronic Supplementary Material</xref> for a detailed description of the search strategy.</p></sec><sec id="Sec4"><title>Study selection</title><p>Two authors reviewed article titles and abstracts for eligibility. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.</p><p>We included studies if they met all of the following criteria: (1) the study assessed diagnostic performance of stress perfusion MRI, stress perfusion contrast-enhanced ECHO, stress perfusion SPECT, or stress perfusion PET as a diagnostic test for CAD, (2) a prospective study design was used, (3) the study population consisted of known (previously diagnosed) or suspected adult CAD patients, (4) CCA was used as the reference standard test in all patients irrespective of the non-invasive test result, i.e. selective verification was not present, (5) obstructive CAD was defined as at least 1 vessel with at least 50 %, at least 70 % or at least 75 % lumen diameter reduction and, (6) absolute numbers of true positives (TP), false positives (FP), true negatives (TN) and false negatives (FN) were available at the patient level or could be derived adequately.</p><p>Studies were excluded if they met one of the following criteria: (1) the article was a review or meta-analysis, (2) patients had (suspected) acute coronary syndrome (ACS), (3) normal healthy volunteers or asymptomatic patients were included, (4) less than 30 patients were included (criterion to avoid TPs, FPs, TNs or FNs of zero), (5) (potentially) overlapping study populations were reported, (6) a very specific patient population (e.g. only patients with a heart transplant, left bundle branch block or aortic stenosis) was studied, (7) the study focused on in-stent or graft stenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).</p></sec><sec id="Sec5"><title>Data extraction</title><p>Two authors independently extracted data on author, journal, year of publication, technique used, country, hospital type, number of patients, mean age, percentage male, patient selection, brand of imaging device, magnetic field strength, radiotracer, contrast agent used, type of assessment (qualitative or quantitative), stressor used, CAD definition and the numbers of TP, FP, TN and FN. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.</p><p>If a study reported pairs of sensitivities and specificities at different cut-off points, we extracted the pair with the highest sensitivity. When studies reported data for multiple CAD definitions (e.g. at least 50 % and at least 70 % stenosis), the highest sensitivity was used to calculate the overall estimates. This also applied when studies reported sensitivities and specificities for different observers.</p></sec><sec id="Sec6"><title>Quality assessment</title><p>We used a modified QUADAS checklist (quality assessment of studies of diagnostic performance included in systematic reviews) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR14">14</xref>] to assess the quality of included studies. Two authors independently assessed the study quality of the included articles. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.</p></sec><sec id="Sec7"><title>Statistical analysis and data synthesis</title><p>We analysed the data at the patient level using a bivariate random effects regression model [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR15">15</xref>]. The model assumes a binomial distribution of the within-study variability (variability between sensitivity and specificity within a study). The model furthermore assumes correlated normally distributed random effects between studies. The degree of correlation between the logit sensitivity and logit specificity corresponds to the inverse relation between sensitivity and specificity when the positivity criterion is varied. Additionally, meta-regression was performed to explore the effect of differences in patient selection and CAD disease definition, taking into account the possible interaction between differences in CAD disease definition and the techniques considered.</p><p>The data of each study were summarised in forest plots and summary estimates with a 95 % confidence interval of sensitivity and specificity for each imaging technique. Additionally, we summarised these numbers in receiver operator characteristic (ROC) spaces showing the summary estimates with a 95 % confidence region and a summary curve. To distinguish SPECT studies that used different protocols, we highlighted the studies that combined gated-SPECT with the use of <sup>99m</sup>technetium as a radiotracer (Fig. <xref rid="Fig4" ref-type="fig">4</xref>). Similarly, MRI studies that included the assessment of delayed contrast enhancement were highlighted. Figures were created using Cochrane’s Review Manager (version 5, Copenhagen, Denmark).</p><p>To estimate the clinical utility of each technique we calculated the positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR + and LR−). The likelihood ratio is equivalent to the ratio of the likelihood of a certain test result in patients with the disease and the likelihood of the same test result in those without the disease. LR+ [= sensitivity/(1 − specificity)] describes the likelihood when the test is positive and LR− [= (1 − sensitivity)/specificity] describes the likelihood when the test is negative. To illustrate the clinical utility, we used the LRs to calculate post-test probabilities across the range of possible pre-test probabilities (Fig. <xref rid="Fig5" ref-type="fig">5</xref>).</p><p>Finally, we calculated the natural logarithm of the diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR). The lnDOR represents an overall summary estimate of diagnostic performance. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) is the odds of positive test results in patients with disease compared to the odds of positive test results in those without disease which equals the ratio of the positive and negative likelihood ratios.</p><p>We also created funnel plots to assess the presence of publication bias. The funnel plot shows the DOR horizontally and the standard error of the log transformed DOR vertically. Publication bias usually occurs when negative publications (in our case studies with a low DOR) with a small sample size are not published. An asymmetric funnel plot, for example one with fewer studies in the lower left part of the graph, suggests the presence of publication bias.</p><p>The statistical software package SAS (Proc NLMIXED, SAS v9.2, Raleigh, NC, USA) was used for the analyses.</p></sec></sec><sec id="Sec8" sec-type="results"><title>Results</title><p>Medline (PubMed) and Embase searches yielded 1,649 unique studies (Fig. <xref rid="Fig1" ref-type="fig">1</xref>). On the basis of title and abstract we excluded 1,405 articles. On the basis of the full text, we excluded 202 for various reasons detailed in Fig. <xref rid="Fig1" ref-type="fig">1</xref>. Review of the study characteristics shows considerable differences between the included studies (Table <xref rid="Tab1" ref-type="table">1</xref>).<fig id="Fig1"><label>Fig. 1</label><caption><p>Flow chart of systematic literature search</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="330_2012_2434_Fig1_HTML" id="MO1"></graphic></fig><table-wrap id="Tab1"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p>Study characteristics</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th>Author</th><th>Journal</th><th>Year</th><th>Technique</th><th>Country</th><th>Type</th><th>Patients (<italic>n</italic>)</th><th>Mean age</th><th>Age SD</th><th>% male</th><th>Patients<sup>a</sup></th><th>Brand</th><th>Tesla</th><th>Perfusion tests</th><th>Assessment</th><th>Stressor</th><th>CAD definition</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Arnold et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR21">21</xref>]</td><td>JACC Cardiovasc Imaging</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>UK</td><td>N</td><td>65</td><td>64</td><td>9</td><td>65</td><td>S&K</td><td>Siemens</td><td>3</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Bernhardt et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR22">22</xref>]</td><td>JACC Cardiovasc Imaging</td><td>2009</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany and Canada</td><td>A</td><td>823</td><td>64</td><td>12</td><td>76</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Stress, DE<sup>b</sup></td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Cheng et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR23">23</xref>]</td><td>J Am Coll Cardiol</td><td>2007</td><td>MRI</td><td>UK</td><td>A</td><td>61</td><td>64</td><td>8</td><td>75</td><td>S&K</td><td>Siemens</td><td>3</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Cury et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR24">24</xref>]</td><td>Radiology</td><td>2006</td><td>MRI</td><td>Brasil</td><td>N</td><td>46</td><td>63</td><td>5</td><td>81</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td>1.5</td><td>Stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Donati et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR25">25</xref>]</td><td>Am J Roentgenol</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>Switzerland</td><td>A</td><td>65</td><td>64</td><td>9</td><td>81</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Doyle et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR26">26</xref>]</td><td>J Cardiovasc Magn Reson</td><td>2003</td><td>MRI</td><td>USA</td><td>A</td><td>184</td><td>59</td><td>11</td><td>0</td><td>NS</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Gebker et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR27">27</xref>]</td><td>Radiology</td><td>2007</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>N</td><td>40</td><td>61</td><td>8</td><td>70</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Gebker et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR28">28</xref>]</td><td>Radiology</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>N</td><td>101</td><td>62</td><td>8</td><td>70</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>3</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Gebker et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR29">29</xref>]</td><td>Int J Cardiol</td><td>2011</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>N</td><td>78</td><td>65</td><td>10</td><td>76</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dobutamine/atropine</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Giang et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR30">30</xref>]</td><td>Eur Heart J</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>Switzerland</td><td>A</td><td>44</td><td>58</td><td>NA</td><td>78</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td>1.5</td><td>Stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Kawase et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR31">31</xref>]</td><td>Osaka City Med J</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>Japan</td><td>N</td><td>50</td><td>67</td><td>12</td><td>58</td><td>NS</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Nicorandil</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Kitagawa, et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR32">32</xref>]</td><td>Eur Radiol</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>Japan</td><td>A</td><td>50</td><td>65</td><td>9</td><td>72</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>ATP</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Klein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR33">33</xref>]</td><td>J Cardiovasc Magn Reson</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>N</td><td>51</td><td>60</td><td>10</td><td>65</td><td>NS</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Klein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR34">34</xref>]</td><td>JACC Cardiovasc Imaging</td><td>2009</td><td>MRI</td><td>UK and Germany</td><td>A</td><td>78</td><td>66</td><td>8</td><td>90</td><td>K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Klem et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR35">35</xref>]</td><td>J Am Coll Cardiol</td><td>2006</td><td>MRI</td><td>USA</td><td>A</td><td>92</td><td>58</td><td>12</td><td>49</td><td>S</td><td>Siemens</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE<sup>b</sup></td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 % and ≥70 % (≥50 LM)</td></tr><tr><td>Klumpp et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR36">36</xref>]</td><td>Eur Radiol</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>A</td><td>57</td><td>62</td><td>11</td><td>82</td><td>S&K</td><td>Siemens</td><td>3</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Krittayaphong et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR37">37</xref>]</td><td>Int J Cardiovasc Imaging</td><td>2009</td><td>MRI</td><td>Thailand</td><td>A</td><td>66</td><td>61</td><td>12</td><td>58</td><td>S</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Merkle et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR38">38</xref>]</td><td>Heart</td><td>2007</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>A</td><td>228</td><td>61</td><td>11</td><td>79</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 % and >70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Meyer et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR39">39</xref>]</td><td>Eur Radiol</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>A</td><td>60</td><td>59</td><td>10</td><td>63</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>3</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Nagel et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR40">40</xref>]</td><td>Circulation</td><td>2003</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>A</td><td>84</td><td>63</td><td>8</td><td>81</td><td>S</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥75 %<sup>‡</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Paetsch et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR41">41</xref>]</td><td>Circulation</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>N</td><td>79</td><td>61</td><td>9</td><td>66</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Pilz et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR42">42</xref>]</td><td>Clin Res Cardiol</td><td>2006</td><td>MRI</td><td>Germany</td><td>A</td><td>171</td><td>62</td><td>12</td><td>63</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Pingitore et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR43">43</xref>]</td><td>Am J Cardiol</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>Italy</td><td>A</td><td>93</td><td>61</td><td>NA</td><td>70</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Plein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR44">44</xref>]</td><td>Radiology</td><td>2005</td><td>MRI</td><td>UK</td><td>N</td><td>82</td><td>58</td><td>NA</td><td>74</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Plein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR45">45</xref>]</td><td>Eur Heart J</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>Switzerland</td><td>A</td><td>51</td><td>59</td><td>10</td><td>76</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Plein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR46">46</xref>]</td><td>Radiology</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>Switzerland and UK</td><td>A</td><td>33</td><td>58</td><td>11</td><td>73</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>3</td><td>Stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Stolzmann et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR47">47</xref>]</td><td>Int J Cardiovasc Imaging</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>Switzerland</td><td>A</td><td>65</td><td>64</td><td>10</td><td>87</td><td>NS</td><td>Philips</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Takase et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR48">48</xref>]</td><td>Jpn Heart J</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>Japan</td><td>N</td><td>102</td><td>66</td><td>9</td><td>83</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td>1.5</td><td>Rest, stress, DE</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Author</td><td>Journal</td><td>Year</td><td>Technique</td><td>Country</td><td>Type</td><td>Patients (<italic>n</italic>)</td><td>Mean age</td><td>Age SD</td><td>% male</td><td>Patients</td><td>Brand</td><td>Contrast agent</td><td>Perfusion tests</td><td>Assessment</td><td>Stressor</td><td>CAD definition</td></tr><tr><td>Aggeli et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR49">49</xref>]</td><td>Am J Hypertens</td><td>2007</td><td>ECHO</td><td>Greece</td><td>A</td><td>50</td><td>67</td><td>5</td><td>68</td><td>S</td><td>Philips</td><td>SonoVue</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Arnold et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR21">21</xref>]</td><td>JACC Cardiovasc Imaging</td><td>2010</td><td>ECHO</td><td>UK</td><td>N</td><td>65</td><td>64</td><td>9</td><td>65</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>Optison</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Chiou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR50">50</xref>]</td><td>Can J Cardiol</td><td>2004</td><td>ECHO</td><td>Taiwan</td><td>N</td><td>132</td><td>67</td><td>11</td><td>75</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>PESDA</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dobutamine</td><td>≥50 % (≥40 % LM)</td></tr><tr><td>Jeetley et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR51">51</xref>]</td><td>J Am Coll Cardiol</td><td>2006</td><td>ECHO</td><td>UK</td><td>A/N</td><td>123</td><td>62</td><td>12</td><td>71</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>Sonazoid</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Kowatsch et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR52">52</xref>]</td><td>J Am Soc Echocardiogr</td><td>2007</td><td>ECHO</td><td>Brasil</td><td>A</td><td>54</td><td>60</td><td>9</td><td>61</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>PESDA</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Lipiec et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR53">53</xref>]</td><td>J Am Soc Echocardiogr</td><td>2008</td><td>ECHO</td><td>Poland</td><td>A</td><td>103</td><td>58</td><td>9</td><td>63</td><td>S&K</td><td>Siemens</td><td>Optison</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dipyridamole or atropine</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Miszalski-Jamka et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR54">54</xref>]</td><td>Int J Cardiol</td><td>2009</td><td>ECHO</td><td>Poland</td><td>A</td><td>103</td><td>58</td><td>NA</td><td>80</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>Sonovue</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Exercise</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Moir et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR55">55</xref>]</td><td>J Am Soc Echocardiogr</td><td>2005</td><td>ECHO</td><td>Australia</td><td>A</td><td>79</td><td>56</td><td>NA</td><td>80</td><td>S&K</td><td>Philips</td><td>Definity</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>Dipyridamole, exercise</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Peltier et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR56">56</xref>]</td><td>J Am Coll Cardiol</td><td>2004</td><td>ECHO</td><td>Belgium</td><td>A</td><td>35</td><td>62</td><td>10</td><td>71</td><td>S&K</td><td>Agilent Technologies</td><td>PESDA</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Quantitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Senior et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR57">57</xref>]</td><td>Am Heart J</td><td>2004</td><td>ECHO</td><td>UK, Germany, Belgium</td><td>N</td><td>54</td><td>61<sup>†</sup></td><td>NA</td><td>82</td><td>NS</td><td>Philips</td><td>Sonazoid</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Author</td><td>Journal</td><td>Year</td><td>Technique</td><td>Country</td><td>Type</td><td>Patients (<italic>n</italic>)</td><td>Mean age</td><td>Age SD</td><td>% male</td><td>Patients</td><td>Brand</td><td>Radiotracer</td><td>Perfusion tests</td><td>Assessment</td><td>Stressor</td><td>CAD definition</td></tr><tr><td>Aggeli et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR49">49</xref>]</td><td>Am J Hypertens</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Greece</td><td>A</td><td>48</td><td>67</td><td>5</td><td>68</td><td>S</td><td>GE</td><td><sup>201</sup>Tl</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative and qualitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Astarita et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR58">58</xref>]</td><td>J Hypertens</td><td>2001</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Italy</td><td>N</td><td>53</td><td>58</td><td>10</td><td>55</td><td>S</td><td>Picker</td><td><sup>201</sup>Tl</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Exercise</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Budoff et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR59">59</xref>]</td><td>Acad Radiol</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>USA</td><td>A</td><td>30</td><td>54</td><td>9</td><td>70</td><td>NS</td><td>NS</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-MIBI</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Exercise</td><td>>70 % (>50 % LM)</td></tr><tr><td>Doyle et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR26">26</xref>]</td><td>J Cardiovasc Magn Reson</td><td>2003</td><td>SPECT</td><td>USA</td><td>A</td><td>184</td><td>59</td><td>11</td><td>0</td><td>NS</td><td>ADAC</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-MIBI/<sup>201</sup>Tl</td><td>Rest, stress (gated)</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Gonzalez et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR60">60</xref>]</td><td>Rev Esp Med Nucl</td><td>2005</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Chile</td><td>A</td><td>145</td><td>60</td><td>12</td><td>68</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td><sup>201</sup>Tl</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Exercise (<italic>n</italic> = 63), dipyridamole (<italic>n</italic> = 82)</td><td>≥50 % and ≥75 %</td></tr><tr><td>Jeetley et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR51">51</xref>]</td><td>J Am Coll Cardiol</td><td>2006</td><td>SPECT</td><td>UK</td><td>A/N</td><td>123</td><td>62</td><td>12</td><td>71</td><td>S&K</td><td>NS</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-MIBI</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Johansen et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR61">61</xref>]</td><td>J Nucl Cardiol</td><td>2005</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Denmark</td><td>A</td><td>357</td><td>57</td><td>9</td><td>54</td><td>S</td><td>Picker</td><td><sup>201</sup>Tl(rest) and <sup>99m</sup>Tc-MIBI (stress)</td><td>Rest, stress (gated)</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Adenosine or dobutamine (<italic>n</italic> = 180), exercise stress test (<italic>n</italic> = 177)</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Lipiec et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR53">53</xref>]</td><td>J Am Soc Echocardiogr</td><td>2008</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Poland</td><td>A</td><td>103</td><td>58</td><td>9</td><td>63</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-MIBI</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Peltier et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR56">56</xref>]</td><td>J Am Coll Cardiol</td><td>2004</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Belgium</td><td>A</td><td>35</td><td>62</td><td>10</td><td>71</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-MIBI</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Schepis et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR62">62</xref>]</td><td>J Nucl Med</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Switzerland</td><td>A</td><td>77</td><td>66</td><td>9</td><td>62</td><td>S</td><td>GE</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-tetrofosmin</td><td>Rest, stress (gated)</td><td>Semi-quantitative</td><td>Adenosine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Senior et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR57">57</xref>]</td><td>Am Heart J</td><td>2004</td><td>SPECT</td><td>UK, Germany, Belgium</td><td>N</td><td>53</td><td>61<sup>†</sup></td><td>NA</td><td>82</td><td>NS</td><td>Amersham Health</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-tetrofosmin</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dipyridamole</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Yao et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR63">63</xref>]</td><td>Nucl Med Commun</td><td>2000</td><td>SPECT</td><td>China</td><td>N</td><td>64</td><td>51</td><td>NA</td><td>95</td><td>S&K</td><td>Siemens</td><td><sup>99m</sup>Tc-MIBI</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Exercise</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Yeih et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR64">64</xref>]</td><td>J Formos Med Assoc</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>Taiwan</td><td>A</td><td>51</td><td>63</td><td>9</td><td>0</td><td>S&K</td><td>GE</td><td><sup>201</sup>Tl</td><td>Rest, stress</td><td>Qualitative</td><td>Dobutamine</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p><italic>A</italic> academic, <italic>N</italic> non-academic, <italic>NS</italic> not specified, <italic>NA</italic> not available, <italic>PESDA</italic> perfluorocarbon-exposed sonicated dextrose albumin, <italic>S</italic> suspected CAD only (and no history of myocardial infarction (MI), CABG or PCI), <italic>S&K</italic> patients with either suspected or known CAD, <italic>K</italic> known CAD, <sup><italic>99m</italic></sup><italic>Tc</italic><sup>99m</sup>technetium, <italic>-MIBI</italic> sestamibi, <sup><italic>201</italic></sup><italic>Tl</italic><sup>201</sup>thallium, <italic>DE</italic> delayed enhancement, <italic>ATP</italic> adenosine triphosphate, <italic>LM</italic> left main coronary artery</p><p><sup>†</sup>Median; <sup>‡</sup>area reduction</p><p><sup>a</sup>If there was any uncertainty about the study population it was not classified as suspected and/or known CAD but rather as “not specified”</p><p><sup>b</sup>In Klem et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR35">35</xref>] and Bernhardt et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR22">22</xref>] the index test outcome was initially based on delayed enhancement (DE) images, considering perfusion images when DE was negative</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></p><p>Forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Articles on MRI yielded a total of 2,970 patients from 28 studies, articles on ECHO yielded a sample size of 795 from 10 studies, articles on SPECT yielded 1,323 from 13 studies. We could not include any PET studies, which is why PET was excluded from the analysis. The overview of the QUADAS checklist for all studies demonstrates some differences in terms of study quality (see Appendix B in the <xref rid="MOESM1" ref-type="media">Electronic Supplementary Material</xref>). The funnel plots of MRI and SPECT suggest evidence for publication bias, whereas the funnel plot of ECHO shows no obvious evidence for publication bias (Fig. <xref rid="Fig2" ref-type="fig">2</xref>). The sensitivities and specificities of each study vary across studies with sample sizes ranging from 30 to 823 (Tables <xref rid="Tab2" ref-type="table">2</xref> and <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>). The forest plots show the sensitivities and specificities of each study with their 95 % confidence intervals depicted as horizontal lines (Fig. <xref rid="Fig3" ref-type="fig">3</xref>), grouped by CAD definition and study population and then sorted by sensitivity.<fig id="Fig2"><label>Fig. 2</label><caption><p>Funnel plots. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) on the <italic>x</italic>-axis is plotted against the standard error (SE) of the log(DOR) on the <italic>y</italic>-axis. A symmetrical distribution of studies indicates the absence of publication bias. An asymmetrical distribution with, for example, relatively more smaller studies with a positive result (in the <italic>lower right part</italic> of the plot) would suggest the presence of publication bias. In the ECHO funnel plot Peltier et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR56">56</xref>], in the SPECT funnel plot Astarita et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR58">58</xref>] and in the MRI funnel plot Donati et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR25">25</xref>] are not included, because their respective DORs could not be calculated (0 false negatives or false positives). <bold>a</bold> MRI, <bold>b</bold> ECHO, <bold>c</bold> SPECT</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="330_2012_2434_Fig2_HTML" id="MO2"></graphic></fig><table-wrap id="Tab2"><label>Table 2</label><caption><p>Source data for MRI, ECHO and SPECT</p></caption><table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th>Author</th><th>Year</th><th>Technique</th><th>TP</th><th>FN</th><th>TN</th><th>FP</th><th>Sensitivity (%)</th><th>Specificity (%)</th><th> CAD definition</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Arnold et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR21">21</xref>]</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>37</td><td>4</td><td>17</td><td>4</td><td>90.2</td><td>81.0</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Bernhardt et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR22">22</xref>]</td><td>2009</td><td>MRI</td><td>274</td><td>39</td><td>421</td><td>89</td><td>87.5</td><td>82.5</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Cheng et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR23">23</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>MRI</td><td>39</td><td>1</td><td>16</td><td>5</td><td>97.5</td><td>76.2</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Cury et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR24">24</xref>]</td><td>2006</td><td>MRI</td><td>29</td><td>1</td><td>12</td><td>4</td><td>96.7</td><td>75.0</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Donati et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR25">25</xref>]</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>30</td><td>3</td><td>14</td><td>0</td><td>90.9</td><td>100</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Doyle et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR26">26</xref>]</td><td>2003</td><td>MRI</td><td>15</td><td>11</td><td>123</td><td>35</td><td>57.7</td><td>77.8</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Gebker et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR27">27</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>MRI</td><td>19</td><td>3</td><td>14</td><td>4</td><td>86.4</td><td>77.8</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Gebker et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR28">28</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>63</td><td>7</td><td>22</td><td>9</td><td>90.0</td><td>71.0</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Gebker et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR29">29</xref>]</td><td>2011</td><td>MRI</td><td>48</td><td>4</td><td>19</td><td>4</td><td>92.3</td><td>82.6</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Giang et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR30">30</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>26</td><td>2</td><td>12</td><td>4</td><td>92.9</td><td>75.0</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Kawase et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR31">31</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>31</td><td>2</td><td>16</td><td>1</td><td>93.9</td><td>94.1</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Kitagawa et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR32">32</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>33</td><td>3</td><td>8</td><td>6</td><td>91.7</td><td>57.1</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Klein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR33">33</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>22</td><td>3</td><td>23</td><td>3</td><td>88.0</td><td>88.5</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Klein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR34">34</xref>]</td><td>2009</td><td>MRI</td><td>36</td><td>18</td><td>21</td><td>3</td><td>66.7</td><td>87.5</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Klem et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR35">35</xref>]</td><td rowspan="2">2006</td><td rowspan="2">MRI</td><td>34</td><td>10</td><td>42</td><td>6</td><td>77.3</td><td>87.5</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>33</td><td>4</td><td>48</td><td>7</td><td>89.2</td><td>87.3</td><td>≥70 % (≥50 LM)</td></tr><tr><td>Klumpp et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR36">36</xref>]</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>40</td><td>1</td><td>14</td><td>2</td><td>97.6</td><td>87.5</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Krittayaphong et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR37">37</xref>]</td><td>2009</td><td>MRI</td><td>34</td><td>4</td><td>22</td><td>6</td><td>89.5</td><td>78.6</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Merkle et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR38">38</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>MRI</td><td>160</td><td>12</td><td>48</td><td>8</td><td>93.0</td><td>85.7</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>147</td><td>6</td><td>54</td><td>21</td><td>96.1</td><td>72.0</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Meyer et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR39">39</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>32</td><td>4</td><td>19</td><td>5</td><td>88.9</td><td>79.2</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Nagel et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR40">40</xref>]</td><td>2003</td><td>MRI</td><td>38</td><td>5</td><td>37</td><td>4</td><td>88.4</td><td>90.2</td><td>≥75 %</td></tr><tr><td>Paetsch et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR41">41</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>48</td><td>5</td><td>16</td><td>10</td><td>90.6</td><td>61.5</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Pilz et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR42">42</xref>]</td><td>2006</td><td>MRI</td><td>109</td><td>4</td><td>48</td><td>10</td><td>96.5</td><td>82.8</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Pingitore et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR43">43</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>61</td><td>5</td><td>18</td><td>9</td><td>92.4</td><td>66.7</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Plein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR44">44</xref>]</td><td>2005</td><td>MRI</td><td>52</td><td>7</td><td>17</td><td>6</td><td>88.1</td><td>73.9</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Plein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR45">45</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>31</td><td>4</td><td>7</td><td>9</td><td>88.6</td><td>43.8</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Plein et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR46">46</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>MRI</td><td>12</td><td>1</td><td>16</td><td>4</td><td>92.3</td><td>80.0</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Stolzmann et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR47">47</xref>]</td><td>2010</td><td>MRI</td><td>28</td><td>8</td><td>21</td><td>3</td><td>77.8</td><td>87.5</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Takase et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR48">48</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>MRI</td><td>71</td><td>5</td><td>22</td><td>4</td><td>93.4</td><td>84.6</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Aggeli et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR49">49</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>ECHO</td><td>28</td><td>4</td><td>16</td><td>2</td><td>87.5</td><td>88.9</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Arnold et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR21">21</xref>]</td><td>2010</td><td>ECHO</td><td>35</td><td>6</td><td>16</td><td>5</td><td>85.4</td><td>76.2</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Chiou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR50">50</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>ECHO</td><td>69</td><td>16</td><td>36</td><td>11</td><td>81.2</td><td>76.6</td><td>≥50 % (≥40 % LM)</td></tr><tr><td>Jeetley et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR51">51</xref>]</td><td>2006</td><td>ECHO</td><td>74</td><td>11</td><td>19</td><td>19</td><td>87.1</td><td>50.0</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Kowatsch et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR52">52</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>ECHO</td><td>22</td><td>3</td><td>21</td><td>8</td><td>88.0</td><td>72.4</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Lipiec et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR53">53</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>ECHO</td><td>69</td><td>10</td><td>18</td><td>6</td><td>87.3</td><td>75.0</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Miszalski-Jamka et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR54">54</xref>]</td><td>2009</td><td>ECHO</td><td>65</td><td>9</td><td>25</td><td>4</td><td>87.8</td><td>86.2</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Moir et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR55">55</xref>]</td><td>2005</td><td>ECHO</td><td>35</td><td>5</td><td>20</td><td>19</td><td>87.5</td><td>51.3</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Peltier et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR56">56</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>ECHO</td><td>22</td><td>0</td><td>10</td><td>3</td><td>100.0</td><td>76.9</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Senior et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR57">57</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>ECHO</td><td>35</td><td>7</td><td>7</td><td>5</td><td>83.3</td><td>58.3</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Aggeli et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR49">49</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>24</td><td>6</td><td>17</td><td>1</td><td>80.0</td><td>94.4</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Astarita et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR58">58</xref>]</td><td>2001</td><td>SPECT</td><td>23</td><td>0</td><td>14</td><td>16</td><td>100.0</td><td>46.7</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Budoff et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR59">59</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>17</td><td>4</td><td>7</td><td>2</td><td>81.0</td><td>77.8</td><td>>70 % (>50 % LM)</td></tr><tr><td>Doyle et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR26">26</xref>]</td><td>2003</td><td>SPECT</td><td>16</td><td>10</td><td>130</td><td>28</td><td>61.5</td><td>82.3</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Gonzalez et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR60">60</xref>]</td><td rowspan="2">2005</td><td rowspan="2">SPECT</td><td>102</td><td>15</td><td>16</td><td>12</td><td>87.2</td><td>57.1</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>91</td><td>7</td><td>24</td><td>23</td><td>92.9</td><td>51.1</td><td>≥75 %</td></tr><tr><td>Jeetley et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR51">51</xref>]</td><td>2006</td><td>SPECT</td><td>73</td><td>12</td><td>19</td><td>19</td><td>85.9</td><td>50.0</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Johansen et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR61">61</xref>]</td><td>2005</td><td>SPECT</td><td>94</td><td>32</td><td>183</td><td>48</td><td>74.6</td><td>79.2</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Lipiec et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR53">53</xref>]</td><td>2008</td><td>SPECT</td><td>73</td><td>6</td><td>13</td><td>11</td><td>92.4</td><td>54.2</td><td>≥70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Peltier et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR56">56</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>SPECT</td><td>18</td><td>4</td><td>11</td><td>2</td><td>81.8</td><td>84.6</td><td>>70 %</td></tr><tr><td>Schepis et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR62">62</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>32</td><td>10</td><td>32</td><td>3</td><td>76.2</td><td>91.4</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Senior et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR57">57</xref>]</td><td>2004</td><td>SPECT</td><td>20</td><td>21</td><td>11</td><td>1</td><td>48.8</td><td>91.7</td><td>>50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Yao et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR63">63</xref>]</td><td>2000</td><td>SPECT</td><td>42</td><td>3</td><td>18</td><td>1</td><td>93.3</td><td>94.7</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr><tr><td>Yeih et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR64">64</xref>]</td><td>2007</td><td>SPECT</td><td>20</td><td>8</td><td>20</td><td>3</td><td>71.4</td><td>87.0</td><td>≥50 %</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="Tab3"><label>Table 3</label><caption><p>Measures of diagnostic performance for MRI, ECHO and SPECT, estimated using the bivariate random effects model</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="330_2012_2434_Tab3_HTML" id="MO3"></graphic><table-wrap-foot><p>When data were available for both CAD definitions (≥50 % and ≥70 %) the overall estimates only include data from CAD ≥70 % stenosis</p><p>CAD 50 corresponds to the studies that defined obstructive CAD either as >50 % or ≥50 % stenosis</p><p>CAD 70 corresponds to the studies that defined obstructive CAD either as >70 %, ≥70 % or ≥75 % stenosis and studies that combined one of these with >50 % (or ≥50 %) stenosis in the left main coronary artery</p><p>“Suspected” refers to studies that only included patients with suspected CAD without a history of MI, PCI or CABG.</p><p><sup>a</sup>The CAD prevalence defined by “CAD diagnosed by CCA” divided by the total sample size</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap><fig id="Fig3"><label>Fig. 3</label><caption><p>Forest plots. The data are sorted by suspected and known CAD versus suspected CAD and CAD definition of ≥50 % versus ≥70 % stenosis from lowest to highest sensitivity and data are reported at the patient level. <bold>a</bold> MRI, <bold>b</bold> ECHO, <bold>c</bold> SPECT. *When data were available for both CAD definitions (≥50 % and ≥70 %) the summary estimates only include data from CAD ≥70 % stenosis</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="330_2012_2434_Fig3_HTML" id="MO4"></graphic></fig></p><p>Compared with coronary angiography the meta-analysis of the sensitivities and specificities of the different techniques (Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>; Fig. <xref rid="Fig3" ref-type="fig">3</xref>) resulted for MRI in a sensitivity of 0.91 (95 % CI 0.88–0.93) and a specificity of 0.80 (95 % CI 0.76–0.83). Perfusion ECHO showed a sensitivity of 0.87 (95 % CI 0.81–0.91) and a specificity of 0.72 (95 % CI 0.56–0.83). SPECT demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.83 (95 % CI 0.73–0.89) and a specificity of 0.77 (95 % CI 0.64–0.86). The ROC spaces show the summary estimates for sensitivity and specificity of each technique two-dimensionally surrounded by its 95 % confidence area (Fig. <xref rid="Fig4" ref-type="fig">4</xref>). The sensitivity of MRI and SPECT differed significantly (<italic>P</italic> = 0.03). In terms of specificity, no significant differences were found.<fig id="Fig4"><label>Fig. 4</label><caption><p>ROC space with summary estimates for each technique with 95 % confidence areas. This figure shows the diagnostic performance of studies relative to each other with specificity (plotted in reverse) on the <italic>x</italic>-axis and sensitivity on the <italic>y</italic>-axis. Perfect diagnostic accuracy is in the <italic>upper left corner</italic>, where sensitivity and specificity are both 1. <bold>a</bold> MRI, <bold>b</bold> ECHO, <bold>c</bold> SPECT, <bold>d</bold> All three techniques. The <italic>grey rectangles</italic> in <bold>a</bold> refer to the studies using delayed contrast enhancement and in <bold>c</bold> they refer to the studies using gated SPECT with radiotracer <sup>99m</sup>Tc. The size of the <italic>rectangles</italic> corresponds with the inverse standard error of sensitivity and specificity, which correlates with the size of the study</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="330_2012_2434_Fig4_HTML" id="MO5"></graphic></fig></p><p>We found no effect of CAD definition on the sensitivities (Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>; <italic>P</italic> = 0.55). The disease definition greater than/at least 70 % stenosis compared to greater than/at least 50 % stenosis resulted in significantly lower specificities for SPECT (Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>; <italic>P</italic> = 0.045), but no significant differences for ECHO (<italic>P</italic> = 0.39) and MRI (<italic>P</italic> = 0.51). Furthermore, we found no effect of CAD definition on the lnDORs of MRI (<italic>P</italic> = 0.24), ECHO (<italic>P</italic> = 0.96) and SPECT (<italic>P</italic> = 0.34) (Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>).</p><p>Furthermore, MRI, ECHO and SPECT showed no significant differences in terms of sensitivity, specificity and lnDOR when comparing patients with suspected CAD without a prior history of CAD to patients with known or suspected CAD (all <italic>P</italic> values >0.05; Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>).</p><p>We did not observe an association between the use of gated-SPECT in combination with <sup>99m</sup>technetium as radiotracer and the diagnostic performance of SPECT (Fig. <xref rid="Fig4" ref-type="fig">4</xref>). MRI studies that assessed delayed contrast enhancement were associated with high sensitivities albeit with a wide range of specificities (Fig. <xref rid="Fig4" ref-type="fig">4</xref>).</p><p>The positive likelihood ratios (LR+) of MRI, ECHO and SPECT were 4.43 (95 % CI 3.64–5.23), 3.08 (95 % CI 1.65–4.50) and 3.56 (95 % CI 2.07–5.04) respectively (Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>). The negative likelihood ratios (LR-) for MRI, ECHO, and SPECT were 0.12 (95 % CI 0.08–0.15), 0.18 (95 % CI 0.13–0.24) and 0.22 (95 % CI 0.14–0.31), respectively. Figure <xref rid="Fig5" ref-type="fig">5</xref> illustrates the revised probability of CAD after a positive and negative test. The lnDORs of MRI, ECHO and SPECT were 3.63 (95 % CI 3.26–4.00), 2.83 (95 % CI 2.29–3.37) and 2.76 (95 % CI 2.28–3.25), respectively (Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>). We found significantly higher lnDORs for MRI in comparison with SPECT (<italic>P</italic> = 0.006) and ECHO (<italic>P</italic> = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the lnDOR of SPECT and ECHO (<italic>P</italic> = 0.52).<fig id="Fig5"><label>Fig. 5</label><caption><p>Revised probability of CAD. This figure shows the revised (post-test) probability of CAD (<italic>y</italic>-axis) as a function of prior (pre-test) probability (<italic>x</italic>-axis) of CAD for positive and negative MPI results, based on the likelihood ratios presented in Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref> (overall analysis). MRI+, ECHO+ and SPECT+ represent the lines for a positive test result and MRI−, ECHO− and SPECT− represent the lines for a negative test result</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="330_2012_2434_Fig5_HTML" id="MO6"></graphic></fig></p></sec><sec id="Sec9" sec-type="discussion"><title>Discussion</title><p>In this systematic review and meta-analysis we compared the diagnostic performance of different stress MPI techniques. MRI showed the best diagnostic performance with the narrowest confidence intervals; the latter is explained by the large number of patients studied with MRI. We found a significantly higher sensitivity for MRI compared to SPECT and a significantly higher lnDOR for MRI compared to both ECHO and SPECT. In contrast to previous meta-analyses [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR9">9</xref>], we compared the different imaging techniques using the same search strategy and methods of analysing the data. Furthermore, we only included studies without verification bias.</p><p>In our review we paid special attention to the issue of verification bias. Sensitivity may be overestimated and specificity underestimated if patients with a positive test result are more likely to be verified with the reference standard test. Diagnostic odds ratios are generally not, or only minimally, affected by verification bias [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR16">16</xref>]. Underwood et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR9">9</xref>] reviewed the diagnostic performance of SPECT and explained the overall low specificity (0.70–0.75 for high quality studies) of SPECT studies by verification bias. In their review of SPECT studies, Heijenbrok-Kal et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR13">13</xref>] did not exclude studies with verification bias and demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.88 (95 % CI 0.87–0.90) and a specificity of 0.73 (95 % CI 0.69–0.74). By excluding studies with verification bias, we found a lower sensitivity of 0.83 (95 % CI 0.73–0.89), but a higher specificity of 0.77 (95 % CI 0.64–0.86). As pointed out above, the diagnostic odds ratios are less affected by verification bias and were the same for the previous and current review.</p><p>Nandalur et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR7">7</xref>] and Hamon et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR10">10</xref>] previously studied the diagnostic performance of myocardial perfusion MRI and found sensitivities of 91 % and 89 % respectively and specificities of 81 % and 80 % respectively, which is very similar to what we found. Unfortunately we could not include PET in the analysis, because no PET studies met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Nandalur et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR6">6</xref>] performed a meta-analysis of PET perfusion studies and they found a sensitivity of 0.92 and a specificity of 0.85. However, their analysis included studies with potential verification bias. Stress perfusion CT is an upcoming MPI technique, but we did not include this technique because of the low number of available studies and because perfusion CT is still in the technical development phase.</p><p>Other promising alternatives to CCA are non-invasive CT and MR coronary angiography. Schuetz et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR17">17</xref>] compared CT and MR coronary angiography to CCA in a meta-analysis resulting in a sensitivity and specificity of respectively 0.97 and 0.87 for CT, and 0.87 and 0.70 for MR, suggesting that CT angiography has a better diagnostic performance compared to the MPI techniques analysed in this article. However, drawbacks of CT angiography are the use of iodinated contrast material which poses a small risk of idiosyncratic reactions and nephrotoxicity and the lack of functional information [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR18">18</xref>].</p><sec id="Sec10"><title>Limitations</title><p>We focused on the diagnostic performance of MPI. However, an MPI examination can yield functional information as well (e.g. left ventricular function, presence of wall motion abnormalities, presence of scar tissue), rather than perfusion images alone. Our analysis does not take into account the possible impact of these parameters on the interpretation of the MPI test and the results of MRI are therefore likely to be even better than we estimated.</p><p>Also, it is important to note that in clinical practice a small proportion of patients will be unsuitable for MRI, either due to contraindications or claustrophobia. Likewise, an echocardiography procedure relies on an adequate acoustic window. Often, unsuitable patients were excluded from the original studies, which in turn could have resulted in an overestimation of the diagnostic performance in our analysis. Unfortunately, the included studies did not report sufficient information to explore these issues.</p><p>In the current review we included only studies that used the most advanced technology by searching for studies published from 2000 until 2011, which implies that some large landmark SPECT studies performed in the 1980s and 1990s were excluded from our analysis. A previously published comprehensive systematic review sheds light on the effect of this exclusion criterion [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR13">13</xref>]. In the previous review 103 SPECT studies with a total of 11,977 patients published between 1984 and 2002 were analysed. There is no overlap with the SPECT studies that we included. The diagnostic odds ratios for SPECT found in the previous review and in the current review are the same: they found an lnDOR of 2.8 (95 % CI 2.6–3.0) compared to our lnDOR of 2.8 (95 % CI 2.3–3.3).</p><p>The funnel plot for MRI and SPECT suggests that there is evidence of publication bias, which implies that our summary measures may be overestimated. Nevertheless, the overestimation applies to both MRI and SPECT. The funnel plot for ECHO does not suggest evidence of publication bias.</p><p>Heterogeneity across studies is a limitation of meta-analyses of diagnostic performance. Across studies differences exist with respect to imaging techniques, assessment methods, stressors, radiotracers, contrast media, CAD definition (lumen diameter reduction of at least 50 %, at least 70 % or at least 75 %), CAD prevalence, percentage male patients, patient inclusion criteria, setting and country. Although we were able to analyse the effect of using different CAD definitions and patient inclusion criteria, sample size limitations did not allow us to do subset analyses for the other cross-study variations. Due to chance there will always be variability between studies, but there may also be different types of biases influencing the results. We used a random effects model which adjusts the estimates and confidence intervals to account for between-study variations. Nevertheless, heterogeneity across studies remains an important limitation.</p><p>For calculation and precision purposes, we excluded studies with less than 30 patients. In this way, we minimised the number of studies with for example zero FPs or FNs. This exclusion criterion may have introduced a selection bias.</p><p>Another limitation of meta-analyses is the dependence on the level of detail reported in the original papers. For example, data on the individual territories were generally not available. Furthermore, most studies included a mix of known and suspected CAD patients or did not report the test characteristics for the subgroup of patients with suspected CAD without a prior history of MI, PCI or CABG. Therefore, our subgroup analysis of suspected CAD was limited due to a small sample size. Nevertheless, our analysis did suggest that the diagnostic performance of MPI tests is not substantially affected by including patients with known CAD.</p><p>Although our results show that all tests are reasonably accurate, the likelihood ratios suggest that neither one of them is suitable to rule out or rule in the presence of disease [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR19">19</xref>]. This can also be seen in Fig. <xref rid="Fig5" ref-type="fig">5</xref>, where the post-test probability after a positive test rarely exceeds 90 %, and the post-test probability of disease after a negative test may still be substantial. Since MPI is intended as a gatekeeper test, ruling out disease is more important than ruling in disease. MRI performs quite well in this respect with an LR− of 0.12 (0.08–0.15). SPECT and ECHO demonstrate less favourable LRs (Table <xref rid="Tab3" ref-type="table">3</xref>).</p><p>The reference standard test for diagnosing CAD is CCA. Innovative technological developments in diagnosing CAD are most often compared with CCA. The limitation of CCA is that it evaluates the lumen diameter reduction of the coronary arteries, but for instance a 50 % vessel diameter reduction does not always result in the same reduction in blood flow and does not necessarily lead to myocardial ischaemia. There are alternative techniques such as fractional flow reserve (FFR) that measure the pressure difference across a coronary stenosis. It is even possible that the imaging techniques we evaluated are better diagnostic tools than CCA to begin with, since they measure myocardial perfusion which is the physiological basis of myocardial function. Thus, the less than perfect sensitivity and specificity could in part be attributed to imperfections of CCA instead of the limitations of perfusion imaging.</p></sec><sec id="Sec11"><title>Clinical implications</title><p>The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that MRI is superior to ECHO and SPECT in diagnosing CAD. This statement is strengthened firstly by the findings of the MR-IMPACT study [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR5">5</xref>]—a multicentre randomised trial—which suggested that MRI is superior to SPECT and secondly by the findings of the EuroCMR registry [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CR20">20</xref>], which demonstrated that in patients who underwent stress MRI for the diagnostic workup of suspected CAD, invasive angiography could be avoided in nearly one-half of the patients. All in all, the results suggest that stress perfusion MRI is potentially useful as a gatekeeper test before CCA in patients with low to intermediate prior probability of CAD but this needs to be confirmed with a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis. Furthermore, more research of the diagnostic performance of stress perfusion ECHO, PET and CT is required to evaluate their clinical usefulness.</p><p>In conclusion, our results suggest that stress perfusion MRI is superior for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD compared to stress perfusion contrast-enhanced echocardiography and SPECT, and that echocardiography and SPECT are similar in terms of diagnostic performance.</p></sec></sec><sec sec-type="supplementary-material" id="AppESM1"><title>Electronic supplementary material</title><sec id="SecESM1"><p><supplementary-material content-type="local-data" id="MOESM1"><media xlink:href="330_2012_2434_MOESM1_ESM.doc" mimetype="application" mime-subtype="msword"><label>ESM 1</label><caption><p>(DOC 187 kb)</p></caption></media></supplementary-material></p></sec></sec></body><back><ack><sec id="d29e5849"><title>Open Access</title><p>This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.</p></sec></ack><ref-list id="Bib1"><title>References</title><ref id="CR1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Murray</surname><given-names>CJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Lopez</surname><given-names>AD</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Global mortality, disability, and the contribution of risk factors: Global Burden of Disease Study</article-title><source>Lancet</source><year>1997</year><volume>349</volume><fpage>1436</fpage><lpage>1442</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0140-6736(96)07495-8</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9164317</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kwok</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Grady</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Segal</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Redberg</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Meta-analysis of exercise testing to detect coronary artery disease in women</article-title><source>Am J Cardiol</source><year>1999</year><volume>83</volume><fpage>660</fpage><lpage>666</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00963-1</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10080415</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Noto</surname><given-names>TJ</given-names><suffix>Jr</suffix></name><name><surname>Johnson</surname><given-names>LW</given-names></name><name><surname>Krone</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Cardiac catheterization 1990: a report of the Registry of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCA&I)</article-title><source>Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn</source><year>1991</year><volume>24</volume><fpage>75</fpage><lpage>83</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/ccd.1810240202</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">1742788</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Scanlon</surname><given-names>PJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Faxon</surname><given-names>DP</given-names></name><name><surname>Audet</surname><given-names>AM</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>ACC/AHA guidelines for coronary angiography. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on Coronary Angiography). Developed in collaboration with the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions</article-title><source>J Am Coll Cardiol</source><year>1999</year><volume>33</volume><fpage>1756</fpage><lpage>1824</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00126-6</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10334456</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Schwitter</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Wacker</surname><given-names>CM</given-names></name><name><surname>Rossum</surname><given-names>AC</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>MR-IMPACT: comparison of perfusion-cardiac magnetic resonance with single-photon emission computed tomography for the detection of coronary artery disease in a multicentre, multivendor, randomized trial</article-title><source>Eur Heart J</source><year>2008</year><volume>29</volume><fpage>480</fpage><lpage>489</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/eurheartj/ehm617</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18208849</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nandalur</surname><given-names>KR</given-names></name><name><surname>Dwamena</surname><given-names>BA</given-names></name><name><surname>Choudhri</surname><given-names>AF</given-names></name><name><surname>Nandalur</surname><given-names>SR</given-names></name><name><surname>Reddy</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Carlos</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis</article-title><source>Acad Radiol</source><year>2008</year><volume>15</volume><fpage>444</fpage><lpage>451</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.acra.2007.08.012</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18342769</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nandalur</surname><given-names>KR</given-names></name><name><surname>Dwamena</surname><given-names>BA</given-names></name><name><surname>Choudhri</surname><given-names>AF</given-names></name><name><surname>Nandalur</surname><given-names>MR</given-names></name><name><surname>Carlos</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Diagnostic performance of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis</article-title><source>J Am Coll Cardiol</source><year>2007</year><volume>50</volume><fpage>1343</fpage><lpage>1353</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jacc.2007.06.030</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17903634</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Abdelmoneim</surname><given-names>SS</given-names></name><name><surname>Dhoble</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Bernier</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Quantitative myocardial contrast echocardiography during pharmacological stress for diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies</article-title><source>Eur J Echocardiogr</source><year>2009</year><volume>10</volume><fpage>813</fpage><lpage>825</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/ejechocard/jep084</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19549700</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Underwood</surname><given-names>SR</given-names></name><name><surname>Anagnostopoulos</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Cerqueira</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: the evidence</article-title><source>Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging</source><year>2004</year><volume>31</volume><fpage>261</fpage><lpage>291</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00259-003-1344-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15129710</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hamon</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Fau</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Nee</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Ehtisham</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Morello</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance for detection of coronary artery disease</article-title><source>J Cardiovasc Magn Reson</source><year>2010</year><volume>12</volume><fpage>29</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1532-429X-12-29</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20482819</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Moher</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Liberati</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Tetzlaff</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Altman</surname><given-names>DG</given-names></name><name><surname>Group</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement</article-title><source>BMJ</source><year>2009</year><volume>339</volume><fpage>b2535</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/bmj.b2535</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19622551</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liberati</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Altman</surname><given-names>DG</given-names></name><name><surname>Tetzlaff</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration</article-title><source>BMJ</source><year>2009</year><volume>339</volume><fpage>b2700</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/bmj.b2700</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19622552</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Heijenbrok-Kal</surname><given-names>MH</given-names></name><name><surname>Fleischmann</surname><given-names>KE</given-names></name><name><surname>Hunink</surname><given-names>MG</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Stress echocardiography, stress single-photon-emission computed tomography and electron beam computed tomography for the assessment of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of diagnostic performance</article-title><source>Am Heart J</source><year>2007</year><volume>154</volume><fpage>415</fpage><lpage>423</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ahj.2007.04.061</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17719283</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Whiting</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Rutjes</surname><given-names>AW</given-names></name><name><surname>Reitsma</surname><given-names>JB</given-names></name><name><surname>Bossuyt</surname><given-names>PM</given-names></name><name><surname>Kleijnen</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews</article-title><source>BMC Med Res Methodol</source><year>2003</year><volume>3</volume><fpage>25</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1471-2288-3-25</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14606960</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Arends</surname><given-names>LR</given-names></name><name><surname>Hamza</surname><given-names>TH</given-names></name><name><surname>Houwelingen</surname><given-names>JC</given-names></name><name><surname>Heijenbrok-Kal</surname><given-names>MH</given-names></name><name><surname>Hunink</surname><given-names>MG</given-names></name><name><surname>Stijnen</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of ROC curves</article-title><source>Med Decis Making</source><year>2008</year><volume>28</volume><fpage>621</fpage><lpage>638</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0272989X08319957</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18591542</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Knottnerus</surname><given-names>JA</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>The effects of disease verification and referral on the relationship between symptoms and diseases</article-title><source>Med Decis Making</source><year>1987</year><volume>7</volume><fpage>139</fpage><lpage>148</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0272989X8700700304</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">3613914</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Schuetz</surname><given-names>GM</given-names></name><name><surname>Zacharopoulou</surname><given-names>NM</given-names></name><name><surname>Schlattmann</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Dewey</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Meta-analysis: noninvasive coronary angiography using computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging</article-title><source>Ann Intern Med</source><year>2010</year><volume>152</volume><fpage>167</fpage><lpage>177</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20124233</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Einstein</surname><given-names>AJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Henzlova</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Rajagopalan</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography</article-title><source>JAMA</source><year>2007</year><volume>298</volume><fpage>317</fpage><lpage>323</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1001/jama.298.3.317</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17635892</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jaeschke</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Guyatt</surname><given-names>GH</given-names></name><name><surname>Sackett</surname><given-names>DL</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Users’ guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group</article-title><source>JAMA</source><year>1994</year><volume>271</volume><fpage>703</fpage><lpage>707</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1001/jama.1994.03510330081039</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">8309035</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bruder</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name><name><surname>Schneider</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Nothnagel</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>EuroCMR (European Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance) registry: results of the German pilot phase</article-title><source>J Am Coll Cardiol</source><year>2009</year><volume>54</volume><fpage>1457</fpage><lpage>1466</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.003</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19682818</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Arnold</surname><given-names>JR</given-names></name><name><surname>Karamitsos</surname><given-names>TD</given-names></name><name><surname>Pegg</surname><given-names>TJ</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Adenosine stress myocardial contrast echocardiography for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparison with coronary angiography and cardiac magnetic resonance</article-title><source>JACC Cardiovasc Imaging</source><year>2010</year><volume>3</volume><fpage>934</fpage><lpage>943</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.06.011</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20846628</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bernhardt</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Spiess</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Levenson</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Combined assessment of myocardial perfusion and late gadolinium enhancement in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass grafts: a multicenter study of an integrated cardiovascular magnetic resonance protocol</article-title><source>JACC Cardiovasc Imaging</source><year>2009</year><volume>2</volume><fpage>1292</fpage><lpage>1300</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.05.011</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19909933</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cheng</surname><given-names>AS</given-names></name><name><surname>Pegg</surname><given-names>TJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Karamitsos</surname><given-names>TD</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging at 3-tesla for the detection of coronary artery disease: a comparison with 1.5-tesla</article-title><source>J Am Coll Cardiol</source><year>2007</year><volume>49</volume><fpage>2440</fpage><lpage>2449</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jacc.2007.03.028</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17599608</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cury</surname><given-names>RC</given-names></name><name><surname>Cattani</surname><given-names>CA</given-names></name><name><surname>Gabure</surname><given-names>LA</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Diagnostic performance of stress perfusion and delayed-enhancement MR imaging in patients with coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Radiology</source><year>2006</year><volume>240</volume><fpage>39</fpage><lpage>45</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1148/radiol.2401051161</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16793971</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR25"><label>25.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Donati</surname><given-names>OF</given-names></name><name><surname>Scheffel</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Stolzmann</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Combined cardiac CT and MRI for the comprehensive workup of hemodynamically relevant coronary stenoses</article-title><source>AJR Am J Roentgenol</source><year>2010</year><volume>194</volume><fpage>920</fpage><lpage>926</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2214/AJR.09.3225</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20308492</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR26"><label>26.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Doyle</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Fuisz</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Kortright</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>The impact of myocardial flow reserve on the detection of coronary artery disease by perfusion imaging methods: an NHLBI WISE study</article-title><source>J Cardiovasc Magn Reson</source><year>2003</year><volume>5</volume><fpage>475</fpage><lpage>485</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1081/JCMR-120022263</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12882078</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR27"><label>27.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gebker</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Jahnke</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Paetsch</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>MR myocardial perfusion imaging with k-space and time broad-use linear acquisition speed-up technique: feasibility study</article-title><source>Radiology</source><year>2007</year><volume>245</volume><fpage>863</fpage><lpage>871</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1148/radiol.2453061701</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18024455</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR28"><label>28.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gebker</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Jahnke</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Paetsch</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Diagnostic performance of myocardial perfusion MR at 3 T in patients with coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Radiology</source><year>2008</year><volume>247</volume><fpage>57</fpage><lpage>63</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1148/radiol.2471070596</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18305188</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR29"><label>29.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other">Gebker R, Jahnke C, Manka R et al (2011) High spatial resolution myocardial perfusion imaging during high dose dobutamine/atropine stress magnetic resonance using k-t SENSE. Int J Cardiol. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.01.060</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR30"><label>30.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Giang</surname><given-names>TH</given-names></name><name><surname>Nanz</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Coulden</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Detection of coronary artery disease by magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging with various contrast medium doses: first European multi-centre experience</article-title><source>Eur Heart J</source><year>2004</year><volume>25</volume><fpage>1657</fpage><lpage>1665</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ehj.2004.06.037</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15351166</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR31"><label>31.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kawase</surname><given-names>Y</given-names></name><name><surname>Nishimoto</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Hato</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Okajima</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Yoshikawa</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Assessment of coronary artery disease with nicorandil stress magnetic resonance imaging</article-title><source>Osaka City Med J</source><year>2004</year><volume>50</volume><fpage>87</fpage><lpage>94</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15819303</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR32"><label>32.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kitagawa</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Sakuma</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Nagata</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Diagnostic accuracy of stress myocardial perfusion MRI and late gadolinium-enhanced MRI for detecting flow-limiting coronary artery disease: a multicenter study</article-title><source>Eur Radiol</source><year>2008</year><volume>18</volume><fpage>2808</fpage><lpage>2816</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00330-008-1097-4</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18651152</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR33"><label>33.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Klein</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Gebker</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Kokocinski</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Combined magnetic resonance coronary artery imaging, myocardial perfusion and late gadolinium enhancement in patients with suspected coronary artery disease</article-title><source>J Cardiovasc Magn Reson</source><year>2008</year><volume>10</volume><fpage>45</fpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1532-429X-10-45</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18928521</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR34"><label>34.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Klein</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Nagel</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Gebker</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Magnetic resonance adenosine perfusion imaging in patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery</article-title><source>JACC Cardiovasc Imaging</source><year>2009</year><volume>2</volume><fpage>437</fpage><lpage>445</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jcmg.2008.12.016</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19580726</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR35"><label>35.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Klem</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Heitner</surname><given-names>JF</given-names></name><name><surname>Shah</surname><given-names>DJ</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Improved detection of coronary artery disease by stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance with the use of delayed enhancement infarction imaging</article-title><source>J Am Coll Cardiol</source><year>2006</year><volume>47</volume><fpage>1630</fpage><lpage>1638</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jacc.2005.10.074</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16631001</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR36"><label>36.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Klumpp</surname><given-names>BD</given-names></name><name><surname>Seeger</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Doesch</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>High resolution myocardial magnetic resonance stress perfusion imaging at 3 T using a 1 M contrast agent</article-title><source>Eur Radiol</source><year>2010</year><volume>20</volume><fpage>533</fpage><lpage>541</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00330-009-1580-6</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19760241</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR37"><label>37.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Krittayaphong</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Boonyasirinant</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Saiviroonporn</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Myocardial perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: do we need rest images?</article-title><source>Int J Cardiovasc Imaging</source><year>2009</year><volume>25</volume><fpage>139</fpage><lpage>148</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10554-008-9410-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19132546</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR38"><label>38.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Merkle</surname><given-names>N</given-names></name><name><surname>Wohrle</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Grebe</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Assessment of myocardial perfusion for detection of coronary artery stenoses by steady-state, free-precession magnetic resonance first-pass imaging</article-title><source>Heart</source><year>2007</year><volume>93</volume><fpage>1381</fpage><lpage>1385</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/hrt.2006.104232</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17488772</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR39"><label>39.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Meyer</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Strach</surname><given-names>K</given-names></name><name><surname>Thomas</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>High-resolution myocardial stress perfusion at 3 T in patients with suspected coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Eur Radiol</source><year>2008</year><volume>18</volume><fpage>226</fpage><lpage>233</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00330-007-0746-3</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17851665</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR40"><label>40.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nagel</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Klein</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Paetsch</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Magnetic resonance perfusion measurements for the noninvasive detection of coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Circulation</source><year>2003</year><volume>108</volume><fpage>432</fpage><lpage>437</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1161/01.CIR.0000080915.35024.A9</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12860910</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR41"><label>41.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Paetsch</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Jahnke</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Wahl</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Comparison of dobutamine stress magnetic resonance, adenosine stress magnetic resonance, and adenosine stress magnetic resonance perfusion</article-title><source>Circulation</source><year>2004</year><volume>110</volume><fpage>835</fpage><lpage>842</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1161/01.CIR.0000138927.00357.FB</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15289384</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR42"><label>42.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pilz</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><name><surname>Bernhardt</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Klos</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Ali</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Wild</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Hofling</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Clinical implication of adenosine-stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging as potential gatekeeper prior to invasive examination in patients with AHA/ACC class II indication for coronary angiography</article-title><source>Clin Res Cardiol</source><year>2006</year><volume>95</volume><fpage>531</fpage><lpage>538</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00392-006-0422-7</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16897145</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR43"><label>43.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pingitore</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Lombardi</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Scattini</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Head to head comparison between perfusion and function during accelerated high-dose dipyridamole magnetic resonance stress for the detection of coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Am J Cardiol</source><year>2008</year><volume>101</volume><fpage>8</fpage><lpage>14</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.07.076</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18157957</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR44"><label>44.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Plein</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Radjenovic</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Ridgway</surname><given-names>JP</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Coronary artery disease: myocardial perfusion MR imaging with sensitivity encoding versus conventional angiography</article-title><source>Radiology</source><year>2005</year><volume>235</volume><fpage>423</fpage><lpage>430</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1148/radiol.2352040454</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15858084</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR45"><label>45.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Plein</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Kozerke</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Suerder</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>High spatial resolution myocardial perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance for the detection of coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Eur Heart J</source><year>2008</year><volume>29</volume><fpage>2148</fpage><lpage>2155</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/eurheartj/ehn297</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18641047</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR46"><label>46.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Plein</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Schwitter</surname><given-names>J</given-names></name><name><surname>Suerder</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Greenwood</surname><given-names>JP</given-names></name><name><surname>Boesiger</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Kozerke</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>k-Space and time sensitivity encoding-accelerated myocardial perfusion</article-title><source>Radiology</source><year>2008</year><volume>249</volume><fpage>493</fpage><lpage>500</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1148/radiol.2492080017</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18936311</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR47"><label>47.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Stolzmann</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Alkadhi</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><name><surname>Scheffel</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Combining cardiac magnetic resonance and computed tomography coronary calcium scoring: added value for the assessment of morphological coronary disease?</article-title><source>Int J Cardiovasc Imaging</source><year>2010</year><volume>27</volume><fpage>969</fpage><lpage>977</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10554-010-9738-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21052842</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR48"><label>48.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Takase</surname><given-names>B</given-names></name><name><surname>Nagata</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Kihara</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Whole-heart dipyridamole stress first-pass myocardial perfusion MRI for the detection of coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Jpn Heart J</source><year>2004</year><volume>45</volume><fpage>475</fpage><lpage>486</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1536/jhj.45.475</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15240967</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR49"><label>49.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Aggeli</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Christoforatou</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Giannopoulos</surname><given-names>G</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>The diagnostic value of adenosine stress-contrast echocardiography for diagnosis of coronary artery disease in hypertensive patients: comparison to Tl-201 single-photon emission computed tomography</article-title><source>Am J Hypertens</source><year>2007</year><volume>20</volume><fpage>533</fpage><lpage>538</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.amjhyper.2006.10.003</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17485016</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR50"><label>50.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chiou</surname><given-names>KR</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>WC</given-names></name><name><surname>Lin</surname><given-names>SL</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Real-time dobutamine stress myocardial contrast echocardiography for detecting coronary artery disease: correlating abnormal wall motion and disturbed perfusion</article-title><source>Can J Cardiol</source><year>2004</year><volume>20</volume><fpage>1237</fpage><lpage>1243</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15494776</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR51"><label>51.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jeetley</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Hickman</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Kamp</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Myocardial contrast echocardiography for the detection of coronary artery stenosis: a prospective multicenter study in comparison with single-photon emission computed tomography</article-title><source>J Am Coll Cardiol</source><year>2006</year><volume>47</volume><fpage>141</fpage><lpage>145</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jacc.2005.08.054</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16386678</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR52"><label>52.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kowatsch</surname><given-names>I</given-names></name><name><surname>Tsutsui</surname><given-names>JM</given-names></name><name><surname>Osorio</surname><given-names>AF</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Head-to-head comparison of dobutamine and adenosine stress real-time myocardial perfusion echocardiography for the detection of coronary artery disease</article-title><source>J Am Soc Echocardiogr</source><year>2007</year><volume>20</volume><fpage>1109</fpage><lpage>1117</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.echo.2007.02.008</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17566697</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR53"><label>53.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lipiec</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Wejner-Mik</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Krzeminska-Pakula</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Accelerated stress real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography for the detection of coronary artery disease: comparison with 99mTc single photon emission computed tomography</article-title><source>J Am Soc Echocardiogr</source><year>2008</year><volume>21</volume><fpage>941</fpage><lpage>947</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.echo.2008.02.004</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18385014</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR54"><label>54.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Miszalski-Jamka</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Kuntz-Hehner</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Schmidt</surname><given-names>H</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Impact of previous myocardial infarction on the incremental value of myocardial contrast to two-dimensional supine bicycle stress echocardiography in evaluation of coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Int J Cardiol</source><year>2009</year><volume>136</volume><fpage>47</fpage><lpage>55</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.04.072</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18675474</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR55"><label>55.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Moir</surname><given-names>S</given-names></name><name><surname>Haluska</surname><given-names>BA</given-names></name><name><surname>Jenkins</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>McNab</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Marwick</surname><given-names>TH</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Myocardial blood volume and perfusion reserve responses to combined dipyridamole and exercise stress: a quantitative approach to contrast stress echocardiography</article-title><source>J Am Soc Echocardiogr</source><year>2005</year><volume>18</volume><fpage>1187</fpage><lpage>1193</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.echo.2005.04.004</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16275528</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR56"><label>56.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Peltier</surname><given-names>M</given-names></name><name><surname>Vancraeynest</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name><name><surname>Pasquet</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Assessment of the physiologic significance of coronary disease with dipyridamole real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography. Comparison with technetium-99 m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography and quantitative coronary angiography</article-title><source>J Am Coll Cardiol</source><year>2004</year><volume>43</volume><fpage>257</fpage><lpage>264</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jacc.2003.07.040</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14736446</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR57"><label>57.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Senior</surname><given-names>R</given-names></name><name><surname>Lepper</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name><name><surname>Pasquet</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Myocardial perfusion assessment in patients with medium probability of coronary artery disease and no prior myocardial infarction: comparison of myocardial contrast echocardiography with 99mTc single-photon emission computed tomography</article-title><source>Am Heart J</source><year>2004</year><volume>147</volume><fpage>1100</fpage><lpage>1105</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ahj.2003.12.030</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15199362</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR58"><label>58.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Astarita</surname><given-names>C</given-names></name><name><surname>Palinkas</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Nicolai</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name><name><surname>Maresca</surname><given-names>FS</given-names></name><name><surname>Varga</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Picano</surname><given-names>E</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Dipyridamole-atropine stress echocardiography versus exercise SPECT scintigraphy for detection of coronary artery disease in hypertensives with positive exercise test</article-title><source>J Hypertens</source><year>2001</year><volume>19</volume><fpage>495</fpage><lpage>502</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00004872-200103000-00018</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11288820</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR59"><label>59.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Budoff</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Rasouli</surname><given-names>ML</given-names></name><name><surname>Shavelle</surname><given-names>DM</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Cardiac CT angiography (CTA) and nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI)-a comparison in detecting significant coronary artery disease</article-title><source>Acad Radiol</source><year>2007</year><volume>14</volume><fpage>252</fpage><lpage>257</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.acra.2006.11.006</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17307657</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR60"><label>60.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gonzalez</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><name><surname>Massardo</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Jofre</surname><given-names>MJ</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>201Tl myocardial SPECT detects significant coronary artery disease between 50% and 75% angiogram stenosis</article-title><source>Rev Esp Med Nucl</source><year>2005</year><volume>24</volume><fpage>305</fpage><lpage>311</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1157/13079281</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16194462</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR61"><label>61.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Johansen</surname><given-names>A</given-names></name><name><surname>Hoilund-Carlsen</surname><given-names>PF</given-names></name><name><surname>Christensen</surname><given-names>HW</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging in a study population without post-test referral bias</article-title><source>J Nucl Cardiol</source><year>2005</year><volume>12</volume><fpage>530</fpage><lpage>537</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.nuclcard.2005.04.012</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16171712</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR62"><label>62.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Schepis</surname><given-names>T</given-names></name><name><surname>Gaemperli</surname><given-names>O</given-names></name><name><surname>Koepfli</surname><given-names>P</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>Added value of coronary artery calcium score as an adjunct to gated SPECT for the evaluation of coronary artery disease in an intermediate-risk population</article-title><source>J Nucl Med</source><year>2007</year><volume>48</volume><fpage>1424</fpage><lpage>1430</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2967/jnumed.107.040758</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17785727</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR63"><label>63.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yao</surname><given-names>Z</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>XJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Shi</surname><given-names>RF</given-names></name><etal></etal></person-group><article-title>A comparison of 99Tcm-MIBI myocardial SPET and electron beam computed tomography in the assessment of coronary artery disease in two different age groups</article-title><source>Nucl Med Commun</source><year>2000</year><volume>21</volume><fpage>43</fpage><lpage>48</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00006231-200001000-00008</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10717901</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="CR64"><label>64.</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yeih</surname><given-names>DF</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>PJ</given-names></name><name><surname>Ho</surname><given-names>YL</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Enhanced diagnosis of coronary artery disease in women by dobutamine thallium-201 ST-segment/heart rate slope and thallium-201 myocardial SPECT</article-title><source>J Formos Med Assoc</source><year>2007</year><volume>106</volume><fpage>832</fpage><lpage>839</lpage><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0929-6646(08)60048-0</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17964962</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></pmc></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Belgique/explor/OpenAccessBelV2/Data/Pmc/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000146 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000146 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Belgique
|area= OpenAccessBelV2
|flux= Pmc
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= PMC:3411304
|texte= Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:22527375" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a OpenAccessBelV2
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.25. |  |