Trial reportThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2019
Influence of Cardiac CT based disease severity and clinical symptoms on the diagnostic performance of myocardial perfusion.
Trial report in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- One-step anatomic and function testing by cardiac CT versus second-line functional testing in symptomatic patients with coronary artery stenosis: head-to-head comparison of CT-derived fractional flow reserve and myocardial perfusion imaging.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2021Trial
- Danish study of Non-Invasive Testing in Coronary Artery Disease 3 (Dan-NICAD 3): study design of a controlled study on optimal diagnostic strategy.Open heart · 2023Article
- Cardiovascular imaging 2019 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We aimed to identify factors influencing the sensitivity of perfusion imaging after an initial positive coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) using invasive coronary angiography (ICA) with conditional fractional flow reserve (FFR) as reference. Secondly we aimed to identify factors associated with revascularisation and to evaluate treatment outcome after ICA. We analysed 292 consecutive patients with suspected significant coronary artery disease (CAD) at CCTA, who underwent perfusion imaging with either cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) or myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) followed by ICA with conditional FFR. Stratified analysis and uni- and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of diagnostic agreement between perfusion scans and ICA and predictors of revascularisation. Myocardial ischemia evaluated with perfusion scans was present in 65/292 (22%) while 117/292 (40%) had obstructive CAD evaluated by ICA. Revascularisation rate was 90/292 (31%). The overall sensitivity for perfusion scans was 39% (30-48), specificity 89% (83-93), PPV 69% (57-80) and NPV 68% (62-74). Stratified analysis showed higher sensitivities in patients with multi-vessel disease at CCTA 49% (37-60) and typical chest pain 50% (37-60). Predictors of revascularisation were multi-vessel disease by CCTA (OR 3.51 [1.91-6.48]) and a positive perfusion scan (OR 4.69 [2.49-8.83]). The sensitivity for perfusion scans after CCTA was highest in patients with typical angina and multiple lesions at CCTA and predicted diagnostic agreement between perfusion scans and ICA. Abnormal perfusion and multi vessel disease at CCTA predicted revascularisation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.