IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0078409.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diagnostic Accuracy of Computer Tomography Angiography and Magnetic Resonance Angiography in the Stenosis Detection of Autologuous Hemodialysis Access: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Bin Li
  • Qiong Li
  • Cong Chen
  • Yu Guan
  • Shiyuan Liu

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performances of computer tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for detection and assessment of stenosis in patients with autologuous hemodialysis access. Materials and Methods: Search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library database from January 1984 to May 2013 for studies comparing CTA or MRA with DSA or surgery for autologuous hemodialysis access. Eligible studies were in English language, aimed to detect more than 50% stenosis or occlusion of autologuous vascular access in hemodialysis patients with CTA and MRA technology and provided sufficient data about diagnosis performance. Methodological quality was assessed by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Studies (QUADAS) instrument. Sensitivities (SEN), specificities (SPE), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood values (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and areas under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) were pooled statistically. Potential threshold effect, heterogeneity and publication bias was evaluated. The clinical utility of CTA and MRA in detection of stenosis was also investigated. Result: Sixteen eligible studies were included, with a total of 500 patients. Both CTA and MRA were accurate modality (sensitivity, 96.2% and 95.4%, respectively; specificity, 97.1 and 96.1%, respectively; DOR [diagnostic odds ratio], 393.69 and 211.47, respectively) for hemodialysis vascular access. No significant difference was detected between the diagnostic performance of CTA (AUC, 0.988) and MRA (AUC, 0.982). Meta-regression analyses and subgroup analyses revealed no statistical difference. The Deek’s funnel plots suggested a publication bias. Conclusion: Diagnostic performance of CTA and MRA for detecting stenosis of hemodialysis vascular access had no statistical difference. Both techniques may function as an alternative or an important complement to conventional digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and may be able to help guide medical management.

Suggested Citation

  • Bin Li & Qiong Li & Cong Chen & Yu Guan & Shiyuan Liu, 2013. "Diagnostic Accuracy of Computer Tomography Angiography and Magnetic Resonance Angiography in the Stenosis Detection of Autologuous Hemodialysis Access: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0078409
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078409
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0078409
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0078409&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0078409?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0078409. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.