z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Computed Tomography Angiography Versus Digital Subtraction Angiography for Postclipping Aneurysm Obliteration Detection
Author(s) -
Matthew Uricchio,
Saksham Gupta,
Nicholas Jakowenko,
Marissa Levito,
Nguyen Tuan Vu,
Joanne Doucette,
Aaron Liew,
Stefania Papatheodorou,
Ayaz Khawaja,
Linda S. Aglio,
Mohammad Ali AzizSultan,
Hasan A. Zaidi,
Timothy R. Smith,
Rania A. Mekary
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
stroke
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.397
H-Index - 319
eISSN - 1524-4628
pISSN - 0039-2499
DOI - 10.1161/strokeaha.118.023614
Subject(s) - medicine , digital subtraction angiography , aneurysm , radiology , angiography , computed tomographic angiography , computed tomography angiography , nuclear medicine
Background and Purpose— Digital subtraction angiography has been used as the gold standard to confirm successful aneurysmal obliteration after aneurysm clipping procedures using titanium or cobalt alloy clips. Computed tomographic angiography is a newer, less invasive imaging technique also used to confirm successful aneurysmal obliteration; however, its use compared with digital subtraction angiography remains controversial. Methods— A comprehensive literature search was conducted on Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through November 6, 2017, for studies that evaluated postclipping aneurysm obliteration with both computed tomographic angiography and digital subtraction angiography. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR−) were calculated using the bivariate random-effects model. Results— Out of 6916 studies, 13 studies met inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis. A total of 510 patients with 613 aneurysms were included. Compared with digital subtraction angiography, which detected 87 residual aneurysms, computed tomographic angiography detected 58 resulting in a pooled sensitivity of 69% (95% CI, 54%–81%) and a pooled specificity of 99% (95% CI, 97%–99%). This corresponded to LR+ of 55.5 (95% CI, 23.6–130.9) and LR− of 0.31 (95% CI, 0.20–0.48). Univariate meta-regression revealed that the pooled sensitivity was worse in prospective designs (P interaction <0.05), and the pooled specificity was better in higher-quality studies and for postoperative aneurysm diameters of <2 mm (P interaction <0.001 for both).Conclusions— This meta-analysis revealed that computed tomographic angiography had a favorable LR+ but not a favorable LR−. Thus, this imaging modality may be applicable to rule in, but not rule out, residual aneurysms after clipping.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom