ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2026
Non-invasive estimation of coronary resistance and compliance: Prospective diagnostic study vs. angiography.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early identification of coronary artery disease (CAD) remains challenging, particularly in patients who cannot undergo exercise-based or contrast-dependent diagnostic testing. We evaluated a non-invasive pulse wave-based device, Coronyzer (KH-3000), designed to derive resistance and compliance indices for early screening of CAD. Methods: A prospective diagnostic accuracy study was conducted in 94 patients with suspected angina who underwent coronary angiography (CAG). Significant CAD was defined as ≥50% diameter stenosis. Diagnostic performance was assessed using pre-specified thresholds for resistance (R) and compliance (C). An independent retrospective validation study was performed in 136 patients who underwent CAG and computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA). Diagnostic performance was evaluated using predefined OR and AND decision rules ( Results: In the prospective cohort, sensitivity and specificity were 81% and 89%, respectively. In the validation cohort, the OR rule demonstrated high sensitivity (0.77) with lower specificity (0.41), whereas the AND rule showed lower sensitivity (0.53) but high specificity (0.78). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis demonstrated moderate overall diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.67). Conclusions: Coronyzer demonstrated clinically meaningful diagnostic performance as a non-invasive screening and risk stratification tool for coronary artery disease. By avoiding radiation exposure, contrast agents, and exercise requirements, the device may support early clinical triage and referral for further diagnostic evaluation, particularly in patient populations for whom conventional testing is limited.
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.