JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Predictive value of coronary computed tomography angiography in asymptomatic individuals with diabetes mellitus: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronary CT angiography (CTA) is generally not established as a screening tool for asymptomatic individuals. However, it is controversial whether this test may have a role for screening asymptomatic individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM) due to the high prevalence of asymptomatic coronary artery disease (CAD) in this subgroup.

METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE through May 2017 for studies that reported on the association between findings at coronary CTA and future cardiac events in asymptomatic individuals with DM. Summary hazard ratios for the presence of obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis), presence of non-obstructive plaque (<50% stenosis), segment involvement score, and segment stenosis score were derived using a random effects regression model. I2 was calculated to quantify between-study heterogeneity and causing factors were identified using meta-regression.

RESULTS: A total of 10 studies reporting on 5012 individuals with DM (median age: 62.3 years, median proportion of women: 40.5%) were included in the analysis. The presence of obstructive CAD on coronary CTA (vs. non-obstructive or no CAD) was associated with a significantly elevated risk for adverse events (summary HR: 4.07, 95% CI: 2.30 to 7.21). The estimated summary HR for non-obstructive plaque (vs. no CAD) was 2.17 (95% CI: 1.11 to 4.25). The pooled HRs per unit for segment stenosis score and segment involvement score were 1.44 (95% CI: 0.98 to 2.12), and 1.73 (95% CI: 1.07 to 2.80) respectively. On meta-regression analysis, we observed a trend towards a higher risk estimate in studies with a higher proportion of females (p = 0.1063).

CONCLUSION: The presence and extent of CAD on coronary CTA are strong, independent predictors of cardiovascular events in asymptomatic individuals with DM despite heterogeneity between studies in endpoints, study population and length of follow-up.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app