Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of the screening procedures for the different studies included in the meta-analysis

From: Screening for asymptomatic coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

 

Faglia et al. (2005)

DIAD (2009)

DYNAMIT (2011)

FACTOR-64 (2014)

DADDY-D (2015)

Number of patients in the screening arm

71

561

316

452

262

Patients with positive screening, n (%)

15 (21 %)

83 (15 %)

76 (17 %)a

20 (8 %)

Patients with abnormalb screening, n (%)

15 (21 %)

113 (20 %)

68 (22 %)

76 (17 %)

20 (8 %)

Coronary angiography related to abnormal screening, n (%)

14 (20 %)

25 (4 %)

38 (12 %)

36 (8 %)

17 (6 %)

Proportion of patients with abnormal screening who underwent coronary angiography

14/15 = 93 %

25/113 = 22 %

38/68 = 56 %

36/76 = 47 %

17/20 = 85 %

Patients with significant CAD on coronary angiography performed subsequently to the initial screening, n (%)

9 (13 %)

9 (2 %)

12 (5 %)

Proportion of patients with coronary angiography who had significant CAD

9/14 = 64 %

9/25 = 36 %

12/17 = 71 %

  1. amoderate to severe coronary stenosis by CCTA
  2. babnormal screening included patients with positive screening and patients with non-perfusion abnormality (ischemic ECG changes, transient left ventricle dilation, or baseline left ventricle dysfunction) in the DIAD study; patients with positive screening and SPECT results showing small defects (uncertain results) in the DYNAMIT study