SynthesisEuropean radiology2016
Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance angiography for detection of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of whole heart coronary magnetic resonance angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Pooled it
- Combined non-contrast enhancement 3D bright-blood and 2D black-blood coronary magnetic resonance angiography for the assessment of coronary artery stenosis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- MRCA Combined With Zero-Contrast IVUS-Guided PCI in a Patient With NSTE-ACS and Severe Contrast Allergy.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Long-Term Coronary Artery Evaluation Using Noncontrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography in Patients with Kawasaki Disease.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Factors Affecting the Quality of Non-contrast Coronary Magnetic Resonance Angiography Images: Challenges and Change.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Fast and automatic coronary artery segmentation using nnU-Net for non-contrast enhanced magnetic resonance coronary angiography.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- The Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Athletic Individuals-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Computerized classification method for significant coronary artery stenosis on whole-heart coronary MRA using 3D convolutional neural networks with attention mechanisms.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
- Motion robust coronary MR angiography using zigzag centric ky-kz trajectory and high-resolution deep learning reconstruction.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- A clinical strategy to improve the diagnostic performance of 3T non-contrast coronary MRA and noninvasively evaluate coronary distensibility: combination of diastole and systole imaging.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Article
- Feasibility of 3.0 T balanced fast field echo non-contrast-enhanced whole-heart coronary magnetic resonance angiography.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2023Article
- Application of prospective ECG-gated multiphase scanning for coronary CT in children with different heart rates.Japanese journal of radiology · 2021Article
- A clinical strategy to improve the diagnostic accuracy of 1.5-T non-contrast MR coronary angiography for detection of coronary artery disease: combination of whole-heart and volume-targeted imaging.European radiology · 2021Article
- Article
- Noninvasive imaging of congenital cardiovascular defects.La Radiologia medica · 2020Review
- Non-contrast coronary magnetic resonance angiography: current frontiers and future horizons.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Review
- What did we learn from PET/MR?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020Article
- Near-isotropic noncontrast MRA of the renal and peripheral arteries using a thin-slab stack-of-stars quiescent interval slice-selective acquisition.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2020Article
- Non-invasive imaging of the coronary arteries.European heart journal · 2019Review
- Recent Advances in Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Korean circulation journal · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo review the diagnostic performance of MR coronary angiography (MRCA) for coronary artery disease (CAD).
methodsTwo independent reviewers searched on MEDLINE/EMBASE with the following inclusion criteria: 01/01/2000-03/23/2015 publication date; per-patient sensitivity/specificity for >50 % stenosis confirmed by conventional coronary angiography with raw data provided or retrievable; sample size >10. Quality was appraised using QUADAS2.
resultsNine hundred eighteen studies were retrieved, 24 of them, including 1,638 patients, were selected. Using a bivariate model, the pooled sensitivity was 89 % (95 % confidence interval 86-92 %), the pooled specificity 72 % (63-79 %). Meta-regression did not show a significant impact on sensitivity/specificity for both year of publication and disease prevalence (p ≥ 0.114). Sensitivity of contrast-enhanced examinations (95 %, 90-97 %) was higher (p = 0.005) than that of unenhanced examinations (87 %, 83-90 %). Specificity of whole-heart acquisition mode (78 %, 72-84 %) was higher (p = 0.006) than that of targeted mode (57 %, 45-69 %). Specificity at 3 T (83 %, 69-92 %) was higher (p = 0.067) than that at 1.5 T (68 %, 60-76 %). Risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability were low.
conclusionsSensitivity and specificity of MRCA for CAD were 89 % and 72 %, respectively. A specificity higher than 80 % may be obtained at 3 T. Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols should be preferred for a higher diagnostic performance. KEY POINTS: • MRCA sensitivity and specificity for CAD are below those of CTA. • Contrast administration increased sensitivity to 95 % (90-97 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Whole-heart mode increased specificity to 78 % (72-84 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Specificity at 3 T was borderline-significantly higher (p = 0.067) than at 1.5 T. • Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols are the best approach for MRCA.
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.