Table 181 Evidence profile for the accuracy of SP-CMR compared with ICA in patients suspected of having CAD Outcome No. of participants, Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other Effect per 1,000 patients/year QoE No. of studies considerations PTP study PTP Importance Study design 15% prevalence 85% - ICA cut-off 50% DS - - - - - 44% - True N=677 patients Not serious Serious Not serious Not serious None 135 396 765 Moderate positives k=12 studies (126–141) (370–414) (714–799) ⊕⊕⊕⨀ (substantial Cross-sectional heterogeneity; (cohort type accuracy I2 = study) False 15 44 85 negatives (9–24) (26–70) (51–136) True N=661 patients Not serious Serious Not serious Not serious None 714 470 126 Moderate negatives k=12 studies (655–757) (431–498) (116–134) ⊕⊕⊕⨀ (substantial Cross-sectional heterogeneity; (cohort type accuracy I2 = study) False 136 90 24 positives (93–195) (62–129) (16–34) - ICA cut-off 70% DS - - - - - 50% - True N=776 patients Not serious Serious Not serious Not serious None 137 455 774 Moderate positives k=11 studies (120–144) (400–480) (680–816) ⊕⊕⊕⨀ (substantial Cross-sectional heterogeneity; (cohort type accuracy I2 = study) False 13 45 76 negatives (6–30) (20–100) (34–170) True N=876 patients Not serious Serious Not serious Not serious None 629 370 111 Moderate negatives k=11 studies (527–705) (310–415) (93–125) ⊕⊕⊕⨀ (substantial Cross-sectional heterogeneity; (cohort type accuracy I2 = False study) 221 130 39 positives (145–323) (85–190) (25–57) - All studies - - - - - 51% - True N=1,171 patients Not serious Serious Not serious Not serious None 132 449 748 Moderate
Table 181 Evidence profile for the accuracy of SP-CMR compared with ICA in patients suspected of having CAD Outcome No. of participants, No. of studies Study design Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other considerations Effect per 1,000 patients/year PTP study PTP 15% prevalence 85% QoE Importance - ICA cut-off 50% DS - - - - - 44% - True positives False negatives N=677 patients k=12 studies Cross-sectional (cohort type accuracy study) Not serious Serious (substantial heterogeneity; I2 = Not serious Not serious None 135 396 765 (126–141) (370–414) (714–799) 15 44 85 (9–24) (26–70) (51–136) Moderate ⊕⊕⊕⨀ True negatives False positives N=661 patients k=12 studies Cross-sectional (cohort type accuracy study) Not serious Serious (substantial heterogeneity; I2 = Not serious Not serious None 714 470 126 (655–757) (431–498) (116–134) 136 90 24 (93–195) (62–129) (16–34) Moderate ⊕⊕⊕⨀ - ICA cut-off 70% DS - - - - - 50% - True positives False negatives N=776 patients k=11 studies Cross-sectional (cohort type accuracy study) Not serious Serious (substantial heterogeneity; I2 = Not serious Not serious None 137 455 774 (120–144) (400–480) (680–816) 13 45 76 (6–30) (20–100) (34–170) Moderate ⊕⊕⊕⨀ True negatives False positives N=876 patients k=11 studies Cross-sectional (cohort type accuracy study) Not serious Serious (substantial heterogeneity; I2 = Not serious Not serious None 629 370 111 (527–705) (310–415) (93–125) 221 130 39 (145–323) (85–190) (25–57) Moderate ⊕⊕⊕⨀ - All studies - - - - - 51% - True N=1,171 patients Not serious Serious Not serious Not serious None 132 449 748 Moderate