Prognostic Value of Cardiac MRI and FDG PET in Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background There is no consensus regarding the relative prognostic value of cardiac MRI and fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET in cardiac sarcoidosis. Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prognostic value of cardiac MRI and FDG PET for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in cardiac sarcoidosis. Materials and Methods In this systematic review, MEDLINE, Ovid Epub, CENTRAL, Embase, Emcare, and Scopus were searched from inception until January 2022. Studies that evaluated the prognostic value of cardiac MRI or FDG PET in adults with cardiac sarcoidosis were included. The primary outcome of MACE was assessed as a composite including death, ventricular arrhythmia, and heart failure hospitalization. Summary metrics were obtained using random-effects meta-analysis. Meta-regression was used to assess covariates. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies, or QUIPS, tool. Results Thirty-seven studies were included (3489 patients with mean follow-up of 3.1 years ± 1.5 [SD]); 29 studies evaluated MRI (2931 patients) and 17 evaluated FDG PET (1243 patients). Five studies directly compared MRI and PET in the same patients (276 patients). Left ventricular late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) at MRI and FDG uptake at PET were both predictive of MACE (odds ratio [OR], 8.0 [95% CI: 4.3, 15.0] [P < .001] and 2.1 [95% CI: 1.4, 3.2] [P < .001], respectively). At meta-regression, results varied by modality (P = .006). LGE (OR, 10.4 [95% CI: 3.5, 30.5]; P < .001) was also predictive of MACE when restricted to studies with direct comparison, whereas FDG uptake (OR, 1.9 [95% CI: 0.82, 4.4]; P = .13) was not. Right ventricular LGE and FDG uptake were also associated with MACE (OR, 13.1 [95% CI: 5.2, 33] [P < .001] and 4.1 [95% CI: 1.9, 8.9] [P < .001], respectively). Thirty-two studies were at risk for bias. Conclusion Left and right ventricular late gadolinium enhancement at cardiac MRI and fluorodeoxyglucose uptake at PET were predictive of major adverse cardiac events in cardiac sarcoidosis. Limitations include few studies with direct comparison and risk of bias. Systematic review registration no. CRD42021214776 (PROSPERO) © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Meta-analysis of stent-assisted coiling versus coiling-only for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms.

Endovascular coil embolization is a widely accepted and useful treatment modality for intracranial aneurysms. However, the principal limitation of this technique is the high aneurysm recurrence. The adjunct use of stents for coil embolization procedures has revolutionized the field of endovascular aneurysm management, however its safety and efficacy remains unclear. Two independent reviewers searched six databases from inception to July 2015 for trials that reported outcomes according to those who received stent-assisted coiling versus coiling-only (no stent-assistance). There were 14 observational studies involving 2698 stent-assisted coiling and 29,388 coiling-only patients. The pooled immediate occlusion rate for stent-assisted coiling was 57.7% (range: 20.2%-89.2%) and 48.7% (range: 31.7%-89.2%) for coiling-only, with no significant difference between the two (odds ratio [OR}=1.01; 95% confidence intervals [CI}: 0.68-1.49). However, progressive thrombosis was significantly more likely in stent-assisted coiling (29.9%) compared to coiling-only (17.5%) (OR=2.71; 95% CI: 1.95-3.75). Aneurysm recurrence was significantly lower in stent-assisted coiling (12.7%) compared to coiling-only (27.9%) (OR=0.43; 95% CI: 0.28-0.66). In terms of complications, there was no significant difference between the two techniques for all-complications, permanent complications or thrombotic complications. Mortality was significantly higher in the stent-assisted group 1.4% (range: 0%-27.5%) compared to the coiling-only group 0.2% (range: 0%-19.7%) (OR=2.16; 95% CI: 1.33-3.52). Based on limited evidence, stent-assisted coiling shows similar immediate occlusion rates, improved progressive thrombosis and decreased aneurysm recurrence compared to coiling-only, but is associated with a higher mortality rate. Future randomized controlled trials are warranted to clarify the safety of stent-associated coiling.