ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1240

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy for the Diagnosis of Cardiac Sarcoidosis

Omar Abialmouna1, Mohamad Kalot2, Mohamad Hamade3, Ronak Bahuva2, Ariba Hasmi2, Aamir Ahmed2, Zachary Brumberger2, Jordan Troy2, Ali Choaib4, Ronak Bharucha2, Ross Moyer2, Karin Provost2, Brian Page2 and Umesh Sharma2, 1University at Buffalo, North Tonawanda, NY, 2University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 3University of Miami, Miami, FL, 4Lebanese American University, Beirut, Lebanon

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2022

Keywords: Autoinflammatory diseases, Cardiovascular, Computed tomography (CT), meta-analysis, Subclinical Cardiovascular Disease

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 13, 2022

Title: Imaging of Rheumatic Diseases Poster

Session Type: Poster Session C

Session Time: 1:00PM-3:00PM

Background/Purpose: Autopsy reports for patients with sarcoidosis have suggested that up to 25% have cardiac involvement, mostly undiagnosed. Given the limited diagnostic accuracy of endomyocardial biopsy (EMB), newer modalities are necessary for the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis (CS). Recently, several guidelines have been revised for the diagnosis of CS, as new technologies have been developed. However, the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis remains challenging.

Methods: We systematically reviewed diagnostic test accuracy results in patients suspected of having CS of any age, presenting to inpatient or outpatient settings. The tests of interest for establishing diagnosis in our study are cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET), EMB, and clinical diagnosis based on internationally accepted criteria.

We searched Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for eligible studies, reference lists of relevant reviews, registered trials, and relevant conference proceedings. We included studies that reported data on diagnostic test accuracy (cohort studies, cross sectional studies) for CS. Two investigators screened and abstracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2 and certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework. We pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity.

Results: We systematically screened through 5960 records, of which 53 cohort studies were included for the final analysis (Figure 1). The pooled estimates for sensitivity and specificity for CMR reported in 33 studies were 88% (95% CI 83%-91%) and 69% (53%-81%), respectively (Figure 2). Regarding PET-CT, 37 studies reported on diagnostic accuracy, the pooled estimated for sensitivity were 80% (95% CI 75%-85%) and 73% (95% CI 65%-80%) for specificity (Figure 3). As for EMB, diagnostic accuracy was evaluated in 7 studies and had a pooled sensitivity of 29% (95% CI 13%-51%) (Figure 4). Certainty of evidence varied from low to moderate, seeing the high risk of bias in regards to the reference standard, which was in most cases based on the diagnostic criteria developed by international societies.

Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis is the first study to provide accuracy estimates for different diagnostic modalities for the diagnosis of CS with pooled estimates collected from over 1000 patients in over 50 studies. The results show that the newer diagnostic imaging modalities have very promising diagnostic utility and could potentially be a safe substitute for the use of EMB to establish the diagnosis of CS. The results suggest that these modalities can be a starting point of any diagnostic criteria used for diagnosing CS accurately.

Supporting image 1

Figure 1: PRISMA chart – Systematic review and meta-analysis for test accuracy of cardiac sarcoidosis diagnosis

Supporting image 2

Figure 2: Forest plot of diagnostic accuracy for CMR use in the diagnosis of Cardiac Sarcoidosis

Supporting image 3

Figure 3: Forest plot of diagnostic accuracy for PET-CT use in the diagnosis of Cardiac Sarcoidosis


Disclosures: O. Abialmouna, None; M. Kalot, None; M. Hamade, None; R. Bahuva, None; A. Hasmi, None; A. Ahmed, None; Z. Brumberger, None; J. Troy, None; A. Choaib, None; R. Bharucha, None; R. Moyer, None; K. Provost, None; B. Page, None; U. Sharma, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Abialmouna O, Kalot M, Hamade M, Bahuva R, Hasmi A, Ahmed A, Brumberger Z, Troy J, Choaib A, Bharucha R, Moyer R, Provost K, Page B, Sharma U. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy for the Diagnosis of Cardiac Sarcoidosis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2022; 74 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-systematic-review-and-meta-analysis-of-diagnostic-test-accuracy-for-the-diagnosis-of-cardiac-sarcoidosis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2022

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-systematic-review-and-meta-analysis-of-diagnostic-test-accuracy-for-the-diagnosis-of-cardiac-sarcoidosis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology