ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026
Artificial intelligence detection of heart failure on coronary computed tomography angiography: external validation in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Heart failure (HF) in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is associated with poor prognosis but often under-recognized. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), increasingly used in NSTE-ACS, contains cardiopulmonary features not routinely assessed for HF. We evaluated whether an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm applied to CCTA could identify HF likelihood in NSTE-ACS. Methods and results: In this retrospective external validation study, the AI algorithm was applied without retraining or recalibration to CCTA scans from 1009 patients with NSTE-ACS in the VERDICT trial. Using a pre-specified threshold, patients were classified as low or high AI likelihood of HF. The primary outcome was HF during index hospitalization. The secondary outcome was post-discharge HF hospitalization among patients discharged alive without HF, with analyses adjusted for global registry of acute coronary events score >140 and severe coronary artery disease. Death was treated as a competing risk. Overall, 838 patients (83%) were classified as low AI likelihood and 171 (17%) as high. During index hospitalization, HF was diagnosed in 10 patients (1%) with low AI likelihood and 12 (7%) with high. Sensitivity was 55%, specificity 84%, positive predictive value 7%, and negative predictive value 99%. High AI likelihood was associated with increased risk of index HF (subdistribution hazard ratio, 5.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.32-12.50). After discharge, HF hospitalization occurred in 25 patients (3%) with low AI likelihood and 14 (8%) with high. High AI likelihood remained associated with HF hospitalization (subdistribution hazard ratio 2.56, 95% CI 1.34-4.90). Conclusion: AI-based CCTA analysis identified a large low-risk subgroup and a smaller subgroup at increased HF risk, supporting further evaluation of opportunistic HF assessment from CCTA.
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.