Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Imaging in diagnosis, monitoring and outcome prediction of large vessel vasculitis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis informing the 2023 update of the EULAR recommendations
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Imaging in diagnosis, monitoring and outcome prediction of large vessel vasculitis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis informing the 2023 update of the EULAR recommendations
Do you wish to request the book?
Imaging in diagnosis, monitoring and outcome prediction of large vessel vasculitis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis informing the 2023 update of the EULAR recommendations
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Imaging in diagnosis, monitoring and outcome prediction of large vessel vasculitis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis informing the 2023 update of the EULAR recommendations
2023
Overview
ObjectivesTo update the evidence on imaging for diagnosis, monitoring and outcome prediction in large vessel vasculitis (LVV) to inform the 2023 update of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations on imaging in LVV.MethodsSystematic literature review (SLR) (2017–2022) including prospective cohort and cross-sectional studies (>20 participants) on diagnostic, monitoring, outcome prediction and technical aspects of LVV imaging. Diagnostic accuracy data were meta-analysed in combination with data from an earlier (2017) SLR.ResultsThe update retrieved 38 studies, giving a total of 81 studies when combined with the 2017 SLR. For giant cell arteritis (GCA), and taking clinical diagnosis as a reference standard, low risk of bias (RoB) studies yielded pooled sensitivities and specificities (95% CI) of 88% (82% to 92%) and 96% (95% CI 86% to 99%) for ultrasound (n=8 studies), 81% (95% CI 71% to 89%) and 98% (95% CI 89% to 100%) for MRI (n=3) and 76% (95% CI 67% to 83%) and 95% (95% CI 71% to 99%) for fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET, n=4), respectively. Compared with studies assessing cranial arteries only, low RoB studies with ultrasound assessing both cranial and extracranial arteries revealed a higher sensitivity (93% (95% CI 88% to 96%) vs 80% (95% CI 71% to 87%)) with comparable specificity (94% (95% CI 83% to 98%) vs 97% (95% CI 71% to 100%)). No new studies on diagnostic imaging for Takayasu arteritis (TAK) were found. Some monitoring studies in GCA or TAK reported associations of imaging with clinical signs of inflammation. No evidence was found to determine whether imaging severity might predict worse clinical outcomes.ConclusionUltrasound, MRI and FDG-PET revealed a good performance for the diagnosis of GCA. Cranial and extracranial vascular ultrasound had a higher pooled sensitivity with similar specificity compared with limited cranial ultrasound.
Publisher
EULAR,BMJ Publishing Group LTD,BMJ Publishing Group
