ArticleCirculation reports2025
Clinical Benefits of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography for Evaluating Low-Risk Patients With Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Emergency Department - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Circulation reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical characteristics and diagnostic challenges of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients with normal electrocardiograms: a review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The utility of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), particularly among low-risk individuals presenting to the emergency department (ED), remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review to assess the clinical benefits of CCTA in low-risk patients presenting to the ED with chest pain. Methods and Results: A systematic search of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to March 23, 2023, comparing CCTA performed in the ED with standard care in low-risk patients with NSTE-ACS. Low-risk status was defined as resolved symptoms at ED presentation and no troponin elevation or ischemic ECG changes. Seven RCTs were extracted from the databases. No significant differences were observed between the CCTA and standard care groups in all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, ED revisits, or radiation exposure. However, hospital length of stay was significantly shorter and healthcare costs were slightly lower in the CCTA group. Conversely, revascularization and invasive coronary angiography were significantly more frequent in this group. Conclusions: In low-risk patients with NSTE-ACS, CCTA performed in the ED did not reduce adverse clinical events but was associated with shorter hospital stays and marginally reduced healthcare costs. These findings suggest that CCTA may be a useful tool that supports the safe and early discharge of selected patients.
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.