Objective Taking digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the golden standard, the diagnostic
value of contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) and three dimensional
time of flight magnetic resonance angiography (3D-TOF MRA) were indirectly compared by Metaanalysis
on vertebrobasilar artery stenosis.
Methods PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM and WanFang
Data databases were searched for studies about CE-MRA and 3D-TOF MRA in the diagnosis
of fracture of vertebrobasilar artery stenosis from inception to MAY, 2017. Two reviewers
independently screened literatures according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies by using the QUADAS-2. Stata 12.1 software was used
to pooled sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive likelihood ratio (+LR), negative likelihood
ratio (-LR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Then the summary receiver operating characteristic
curve (SROC) was drawn; the area under curve (AUC) was calculated. The results of indirect
comparison were compared by relative ratio.
Results There were 10 studies out of 1418 records. The results of meta-analysis showed that the
pooled Sen, Spe, +LR, -LR, DOR and AUC of CE-MRA and 3D-TOF MRA for vertebrobasilar artery
which stenosis more than 50% were 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.95], 0.98 (95%CI 0.91-
0.99), 36.1 (95%CI 10.3-126.2), 0.12 (95%CI 0.05-0.27), 307 (95%CI 102-922), 0.97 (95%CI 0.96-
0.98), and 0.94 (95%CI 0.86-0.98), 0.93 (95%CI 0.87-0.97), 14.4 (95%CI 7.1-29.1), 0.06 (95%CI
0.03-0.15), 226 (95%CI 57-902), and 0.98 (95%CI 0.96-0.99), respectively. The result of indirect
comparison were 1.36 (95%CI 0.23-7.94).
Conclusion CE-MRA could be more accurate than 3D-TOF-MRA on the diagnosis of
vertebrobasilar artery stenosis.assessed the risk of bias of included studies by using the QUADAS-2. Stata 12.1 software was used
to pooled sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), positive likelihood ratio (+LR), negative likelihood
ratio (-LR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Then the summary receiver operating characteristic
curve (SROC) was drawn; the area under curve (AUC) was calculated. The results of indirect
comparison were compared by relative ratio.
Results There were 10 studies out of 1418 records. The results of meta-analysis showed that the
pooled Sen, Spe, +LR, -LR, DOR and AUC of CE-MRA and 3D-TOF MRA for vertebrobasilar artery
which stenosis more than 50% were 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.95], 0.98 (95%CI 0.91-
0.99), 36.1 (95%CI 10.3-126.2), 0.12 (95%CI 0.05-0.27), 307 (95%CI 102-922), 0.97 (95%CI 0.96-
0.98), and 0.94 (95%CI 0.86-0.98), 0.93 (95%CI 0.87-0.97), 14.4 (95%CI 7.1-29.1), 0.06 (95%CI
0.03-0.15), 226 (95%CI 57-902), and 0.98 (95%CI 0.96-0.99), respectively. The result of indirect
comparison were 1.36 (95%CI 0.23-7.94).
Conclusion CE-MRA could be more accurate than 3D-TOF-MRA on the diagnosis of
vertebrobasilar artery stenosis.