Interventional Radiology Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations for Neurovascular Disorders Are Not Based on High-Quality Systematic Reviews

Assessment of the Efficiency of Non-Invasive Diagnostic Imaging Modalities for Detecting Myocardial Ischemia in Patients Suspected of Having Stable Angina

This study aimed to assess and compare the efficiency of non-invasive imaging modalities in detecting myocardial ischemia in patients with suspected stable angina as easy-to-understand indices. Our study included 1000 patients with chest pain and possible stable myocardial ischemia. The modalities to be assessed were cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI), single-photon emission computed tomography, positron emission computed tomography (PET), stress echocardiography, and fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography (FFRCT). As a simulation study, we assumed that all five imaging modalities were performed on these patients, and a decision tree analysis was conducted. From the results, the following efficiencies were assessed and compared: (1) number of true positive (TP), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), and true negative (TN) test results; (2) positive predictive value (PPV); (3) negative predictive value (NPV); (4) post-test probability; (5) diagnostic accuracy (DA); and (6) number needed to diagnose (NND). In the basic settings (pre-test probability: 30%), PET generated the highest TP (267) and NPV (95%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 93-96%). In contrast, CMRI produced the highest TN (616), PPV (76%, 95% CI: 71-80%), and DA (88%, 95% CI: 86-90%) and the lowest NND (1.33, 95% CI: 1.24-1.47). Although FFRCT generated the highest TP (267) and lowest FN (33), it generated the highest FP (168). In terms of detecting myocardial ischemia, compared with the other modalities, PET and CMRI were more efficient. The results of our study might be helpful for both patients and medical professionals associated with their examination.

CT-guided special approaches of drainage for intraabdominal and pelvic abscesses: One single center's experience and review of literature

BACKGROUND

To explore the safety and efficacy of several special approaches of drainage for deep inaccessible intraabdominal and pelvic abscesses.

METHODS

By searching of our institutional database, the clinical and radiologic information of all patients with special approaches of abscesses drainage was collected, consisting of etiology, diameter of abscess, duration of drainage, major complications, rates of success, failure and death, and pre-procedure, intra-procedure and post-procedure computed tomography scans.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients are eligible for the criterion in our center between January 2010 and January 2018. The mean diameter of abscess was 5.6 cm (range 3.0-9.8 cm) and mean duration of drainage was 10.3 days (range 4-43 days). Pain was complained in 6 patients (4.8%) and hemorrhage was observed in one patient. Complete resolution of the abscess following drainage was observed in 115 patients (92.7%). A total of 9 patients (7.3%) failed to percutaneous abscess drainage and 3 patients died of catheter-unrelated diseases. Transintestinal afferent loop of drainage was firstly attempted in six patients and complete resolution of abscess was achieved in five patients.

CONCLUSION

Special approaches, including transgluteal, presacral space, transhepatic, multiplane reconstruction (MPR)-assisted oblique approach and transintestinal afferent loop approach for those deep inaccessible intraabdominal and pelvic abscesses are safe and feasible.

Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The PRISMA Statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve transparency of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses. Seven extensions to the PRISMA Statement have been published to address the reporting of different types or aspects of SRs, and another eight are in development. We performed a scoping review to map the research that has been conducted to evaluate the uptake and impact of the PRISMA Statement and extensions. We also synthesised studies evaluating how well SRs published after the PRISMA Statement was disseminated adhere to its recommendations.

METHODS

We searched for meta-research studies indexed in MEDLINE® from inception to 31 July 2017, which investigated some component of the PRISMA Statement or extensions (e.g. SR adherence to PRISMA, journal endorsement of PRISMA). One author screened all records and classified the types of evidence available in the studies. We pooled data on SR adherence to individual PRISMA items across all SRs in the included studies and across SRs published after 2009 (the year PRISMA was disseminated).

RESULTS

We included 100 meta-research studies. The most common type of evidence available was data on SR adherence to the PRISMA Statement, which has been evaluated in 57 studies that have assessed 6487 SRs. The pooled results of these studies suggest that reporting of many items in the PRISMA Statement is suboptimal, even in the 2382 SRs published after 2009 (where nine items were adhered to by fewer than 67% of SRs). Few meta-research studies have evaluated the adherence of SRs to the PRISMA extensions or strategies to increase adherence to the PRISMA Statement and extensions.

CONCLUSIONS

Many studies have evaluated how well SRs adhere to the PRISMA Statement, and the pooled result of these suggest that reporting of many items is suboptimal. An update of the PRISMA Statement, along with a toolkit of strategies to help journals endorse and implement the updated guideline, may improve the transparency of SRs.