Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A systematic review for the evidence of recommendations and guidelines in hybrid nuclear cardiovascular imaging

  • Florent L. Besson
  • , Giorgio Treglia
  • , Jan Bucerius
  • , Constantinos Anagnostopoulos
  • , Ronny R. Buechel
  • , Marc R. Dweck
  • , Paula A. Erba
  • , Oliver Gaemperli
  • , Alessia Gimelli
  • , Olivier Gheysens
  • , Andor W.J.M. Glaudemans
  • , Gilbert Habib
  • , Fabian Hyafil
  • , Mark Lubberink
  • , Christopher Rischpler
  • , Antti Saraste
  • , Riemer H.J.A. Slart*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the level of evidence of expert recommendations and guidelines for clinical indications and procedurals in hybrid nuclear cardiovascular imaging. Methods: From inception to August 2023, a PubMed literature analysis of the latest version of guidelines for clinical hybrid cardiovascular imaging techniques including SPECT(/CT), PET(/CT), and PET(/MRI) was performed in two categories: (1) for clinical indications for all-in primary diagnosis; subgroup in prognosis and therapy evaluation; and for (2) imaging procedurals. We surveyed to what degree these followed a standard methodology to collect the data and provide levels of evidence, and for which topic systematic review evidence was executed. Results: A total of 76 guidelines, published between 2013 and 2023, were included. The evidence of guidelines was based on systematic reviews in 7.9% of cases, non-systematic reviews in 47.4% of cases, a mix of systematic and non-systematic reviews in 19.7%, and 25% of guidelines did not report any evidence. Search strategy was reported in 36.8% of cases. Strengths of recommendation were clearly reported in 25% of guidelines. The notion of external review was explicitly reported in 23.7% of cases. Finally, the support of a methodologist was reported in 11.8% of the included guidelines. Conclusion: The use of evidence procedures for developing for evidence-based cardiovascular hybrid imaging recommendations and guidelines is currently suboptimal, highlighting the need for more standardized methodological procedures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2247-2259
Number of pages13
JournalEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging
Volume51
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2024

Keywords

  • UT-Hybrid-D
  • Evidence-based practice
  • Hybrid imaging
  • Positron emission tomography
  • Recommendations
  • Cardiovascular guidelines

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A systematic review for the evidence of recommendations and guidelines in hybrid nuclear cardiovascular imaging'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this