Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39789341›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2025

Automated stenosis estimation of coronary angiographies using end-to-end learning.

Christian Kim Eschen, Karina Banasik, Anders Bjorholm Dahl, Piotr Jaroslaw Chmura, Peter Bruun-Rasmussen, Frants Pedersen, Lars Køber, Thomas Engstrøm, Morten Bøttcher, Simon Winther and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Between hope and hype: assessing artificial intelligence in cardiovascular imaging.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Christian Kim EschenNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Karina BanasikNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders Bjorholm DahlSection for Visual Computing, Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.
Piotr Jaroslaw ChmuraNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Peter Bruun-RasmussenDepartment of Clinical Immunology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Frants PedersenDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Rigshospitalet, The Heart Center, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lars KøberDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Thomas EngstrømDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Rigshospitalet, The Heart Center, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Morten BøttcherDepartment of Cardiology, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark.
Simon WintherDepartment of Cardiology, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark.
Alex Hørby ChristensenDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Rigshospitalet, The Heart Center, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Henning BundgaardDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Rigshospitalet, The Heart Center, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Søren BrunakNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. soren.brunak@cpr.ku.dk.

Funding

Innovationsfonden 518-00102BNovo Nordisk Fonden NNF17OC0027594
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The initial evaluation of stenosis during coronary angiography is typically performed by visual assessment. Visual assessment has limited accuracy compared to fractional flow reserve and quantitative coronary angiography, which are more time-consuming and costly. Applying deep learning might yield a faster and more accurate stenosis assessment. We developed a deep learning model to classify cine loops into left or right coronary artery (LCA/RCA) or "other". Data were obtained by manual annotation. Using these classifications, cine loops before revascularization were identified and curated automatically. Separate deep learning models for LCA and RCA were developed to estimate stenosis using these identified cine loops. From a cohort of 19,414 patients and 332,582 cine loops, we identified cine loops for 13,480 patients for model development and 5056 for internal testing. External testing was conducted using automated identified cine loops from 608 patients. For identification of significant stenosis (visual assessment of diameter stenosis > 70%), our model obtained a receiver operator characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (ROC-AUC) of 0.903 (95% CI: 0.900-0.906) on the internal test. The performance was evaluated on the external test set against visual assessment, 3D quantitative coronary angiography, and fractional flow reserve (≤ 0.80), obtaining ROC AUC values of 0.833 (95% CI: 0.814-0.852), 0.798 (95% CI: 0.741-0.842), and 0.780 (95% CI: 0.743-0.817), respectively. The deep-learning-based stenosis estimation models showed promising results for predicting stenosis. Compared to previous work, our approach demonstrates performance increase, includes all 16 segments, does not exclude revascularized patients, is externally tested, and is simpler using fewer steps.

Indexed as

Coronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary StenosisCoronary VesselsDeep LearningRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedAgedAutomationFemaleFractional Flow Reserve, MyocardialHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesCoronary angiographyCoronary artery diseaseDeep learningIschemic heart diseaseMyocardial infarctionQuantitative coronary angiography

Identifiers

PMID39789341
PMCPMC11880145

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.