Outcomes of definite vs probable/presumed cardiac sarcoidosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Details
Serval ID
serval:BIB_4283B1FADDE6
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Outcomes of definite vs probable/presumed cardiac sarcoidosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal
Current problems in cardiology
ISSN
1535-6280 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0146-2806
Publication state
Published
Issued date
12/2024
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
49
Number
12
Pages
102820
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Systematic Review ; Meta-Analysis ; Review
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Diagnosing cardiac sarcoidosis (CS), which can be associated with arrhythmias and heart failure, remains challenging despite multiple advances over time. The 2014 Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) consensus statement recommends an endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) to establish a definite diagnosis of CS. In the absence of a positive EMB, a diagnosis of probable or presumed CS is made on the basis of clinical and imaging criteria.
To investigate whether there is any difference in outcomes between definite vs probable/presumed CS.
PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies published after 2014. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects model and presented in forest plots.
6 studies involving 2,204 patients were identified. The cohort had a mean age of 56.8 years (SD: ±13.6 years). The median duration of follow-up was 40.5 months. No statistically significant difference was observed between definite and probable/presumed CS for reduced risk of the composite endpoint (RR: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.93 to 3.49), and all-cause death (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.48 to 2.10).
This meta-analysis demonstrated the equivalence of clinical course and prognosis between definite and probable/presumed CS. This highlights the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach to CS care and emphasizes that histological confirmation should not be a prerequisite to diagnose or manage this condition.
To investigate whether there is any difference in outcomes between definite vs probable/presumed CS.
PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies published after 2014. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects model and presented in forest plots.
6 studies involving 2,204 patients were identified. The cohort had a mean age of 56.8 years (SD: ±13.6 years). The median duration of follow-up was 40.5 months. No statistically significant difference was observed between definite and probable/presumed CS for reduced risk of the composite endpoint (RR: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.93 to 3.49), and all-cause death (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.48 to 2.10).
This meta-analysis demonstrated the equivalence of clinical course and prognosis between definite and probable/presumed CS. This highlights the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach to CS care and emphasizes that histological confirmation should not be a prerequisite to diagnose or manage this condition.
Keywords
Humans, Sarcoidosis/diagnosis, Sarcoidosis/epidemiology, Cardiomyopathies/diagnosis, Cardiomyopathies/therapy, Biopsy/methods, Prognosis, Myocardium/pathology, cardiac sarcoidosis, definite diagnosis, endomyocardial biopsy, outcomes, probable diagnosis
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
30/08/2024 15:38
Last modification date
05/11/2024 7:13