Phase-resolved MRI for measurement of pulmonary perfusion and ventilation defects in comparison with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and (129)Xe MRI

相位分辨磁共振成像技术在测量肺灌注和通气缺陷方面的应用,并与动态对比增强磁共振成像和(129)Xe磁共振成像进行比较。

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the agreement and correlation between phase-resolved functional lung MRI (PREFUL MRI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI in evaluating perfusion defect percentage (QDP), as well as the agreement between PREFUL MRI and (129)Xe MRI in assessing ventilation defect percentage (VDP). METHOD: A systematic search was conducted in the Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant studies comparing QDP and VDP measured by DCE MRI and (129)Xe MRI compared with PREFUL MRI. Meta-analytical techniques were applied to calculate the pooled weighted bias, limits of agreement (LOA) and correlation coefficient. The publication bias was assessed using Egger's regression test, while heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and Higgins I(2) statistic. RESULTS: A total of 399 subjects from 10 studies were enrolled. The mean difference and LOA were -2.31% (-8.01% to 3.40%) for QDP and 0.34% (-4.94% to 5.62%) for VDP. The pooled correlations (95% CI) were 0.65 (0.55 to 0.73) for QDP and 0.72 (0.61 to 0.80) for VDP. Furthermore, both QDP and VDP showed a negative correlation with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)). The pooled correlation between QDP and FEV(1) was -0.51 (-0.74 to -0.18), as well as between VDP and FEV(1) was -0.60 (-0.73 to -0.44). CONCLUSIONS: PREFUL MRI is a promising imaging for the assessment of lung function, as it demonstrates satisfactory deviations and LOA when compared with DEC MRI and (129)Xe MRI. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023430847.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。