SynthesisPloS one2015
Diagnostic performance of echocardiography for the detection of acute cardiac allograft rejection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Doppler echocardiography for surveillance of acute cardiac allograft rejection: a 28-year single-center experience.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2024Article
- Rheumatic Heart Disease in the Developing World.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2023Review
- Non-invasive cardiac allograft rejection surveillance: reliability and clinical value for prevention of heart failure.Heart failure reviews · 2021Review
- Rejection-associated Mitochondrial Impairment After Heart Transplantation.Transplantation direct · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the Graft Mechanical Function Using Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography During the First Year After Orthotropic Heart Transplantation.Annals of transplantation · 2018Article
- Testing the Efficacy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Detecting Transplant Rejection Using a Murine Model of Heart Transplantation.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMany studies have addressed the diagnostic performance of echocardiography to evaluate acute cardiac allograft rejection compared with endomyocardial biopsy. But the existence of heterogeneity limited its clinical application. Thus, we conducted a comprehensive, systematic literature review and meta-analysis for the purpose.
methodsStudies prior to September 1, 2014 identified by Medline/PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrance were examined by two independent reviews. We conducted meta-analysis by using Meta-DiSc 1.4 software. An assessment tool of QUADAS-2 was applied to evaluate the risk of bias and applicability of the studies.
resultsThirty studies met the inclusion criteria of meta-analysis. The four parameters of pressure half time, isovolumic relaxation time, index of myocardial performance and late diastolic mitral annular motion velocity were included in the meta-analysis, with a pooled diagnostic odds ratio of 10.43, 6.89, 15.95 and 5.68 respectively, and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves value of 0.829, 0.599, 0.871 and 0.685 respectively.
conclusionThe meta-analysis and systematic review demonstrate that no single parameter of echocardiography showed a reliable diagnostic performance for acute cardiac allograft rejection. A result of echocardiography for ACAR should be comprehensively considered by physicians in the context of clinical presentations and imaging feature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.