Objectives: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography (CT) in the assessment of global and regional left ventricular (LV) function with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI Web of Science were systematically reviewed. Evaluation included: ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), stroke volume (SV) and left ventricular mass (LVM). Differences between modalities were analysed using limits of agreement (LoA). Publication bias was measured by Egger's regression test. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and Higgins I2 statistic. In the presence of heterogeneity the DerSimonian-Laird method was used for estimation of heterogeneity variance.
Results: Fifty-three studies including 1,814 patients were identified. The mean difference between CT and MRI was -0.56 % (LoA, -11.6-10.5 %) for EF, 2.62 ml (-34.1-39.3 ml) for EDV and 1.61 ml (-22.4-25.7 ml) for ESV, 3.21 ml (-21.8-28.3 ml) for SV and 0.13 g (-28.2-28.4 g) for LVM. CT detected wall motion abnormalities on a per-segment basis with 90 % sensitivity and 97 % specificity.
Conclusions: CT is accurate for assessing global LV function parameters but the limits of agreement versus MRI are moderately wide, while wall motion deficits are detected with high accuracy.
Key points: • CT helps to assess patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). • MRI is the reference standard for evaluation of left ventricular function. • CT provides accurate assessment of global left ventricular function.
Keywords: Computed tomography; Coronary artery disease; Left ventricular function; Magnetic resonance imaging; Meta-analysis.