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