ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2025
Myocardial contrast echocardiography predicts major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in the population after percutaneous coronary intervention-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Existing studies demonstrated that myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE), which provides residual myocardial viability (MV) information, is an effective long-term prognostic tool. However, the specific prognostic value of microvascular perfusion (MVP) parameters detected by contemporary intravenous MCE (IV-MCE) remains to be fully elucidated. Moreover, there is ongoing debate regarding the optimal quantitative diagnostic indicator measured by IV-MCE, including A, β, and myocardial blood flow (MBF), for major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs). This study aims to identify the most effective IV-MCE parameter for predicting MACCEs through a comprehensive meta-analysis. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search for retrospective or prospective cohort studies written in English and Chinese that evaluated the prognostic value of IV-MCE in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (CSTJ), and Wanfang were searched until March 20, 2025. The primary outcome was the diagnostic efficacy of myocardial perfusion score index (MPSI), A, β, and MBF for MACCEs. Secondary outcomes included associations between abnormal MVP, microvascular obstruction (MVO), MPSI, β, MBF and MACCEs occurrence. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves and hazard ratios (HRs) were used to assess diagnostic performance and analyze associations by Stata 15.0. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. The study protocol was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024524641). Results: Sixteen studies involving 1,942 patients were included. The overall study quality was deemed high. Abnormal MVP [HR: 2.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.42-4.79, P=0.002], MVO (HR: 4.51, 95% CI: 2.30-8.83, P<0.001), MPSI (HR: 5.74, 95% CI: 1.41-23.34, P=0.02), β (HR: 7.18, 95% CI: 1.01-51.24, P=0.049), and MBF (HR: 4.62, 95% CI: 2.42-8.83, P<0.001) were found to be linked with MACCEs occurrence. Significant heterogeneity ( Conclusions: The evidence supported that both qualitative and quantitative parameters of IV-MCE can provide moderate predictive power for MACCEs occurrence after PCI, with MPSI and β showing the highest diagnostic performance.
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.