ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2012
Diagnostic performance of exercise bicycle testing and single-photon emission computed tomography: comparison with 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Exercise Stress Testing, Stress Echocardiography, Myocardial Scintigraphy, and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of 104 Studies Published from 1990 to 2025.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Cardiovascular imaging 2012 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To conduct a comparison of the diagnostic performance of exercise bicycle testing and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) with computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with stable angina. 376 symptomatic patients (254 men, 122 women, mean age 60.4 ± 10.0 years) referred for noninvasive stress testing (exercise bicycle test and/or SPECT) and invasive coronary angiography were included. All patients underwent additional 64-slice CTCA. The diagnostic performance of exercise bicycle testing (ST segment depression), SPECT (reversible perfusion defect) and CTCA (≥50% lumen diameter reduction) was presented as sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV) to detect or rule out obstructive CAD with quantitative coronary angiography as reference standard. Comparisons of exercise bicycle testing versus CTCA (n = 334), and SPECT versus CTCA (n = 61) were performed. The diagnostic performance of exercise bicycle testing was significantly (P value < 0.001) lower compared to CTCA: sensitivity of 76% (95% CI, 71-82) vs. 100% (95% CI, 97-100); specificity of 47% (95% CI, 36-58) vs. 74% (95% CI, 63-82). We observed a PPV of 70% (95% CI, 65-75) vs. 91% (95% CI, 87-94); and NPV of 30% (95%, 25-35) vs. 99% (95%, 90-100). There was a statistically significant difference in sensitivity (P value < 0.05) between SPECT and CTCA: 89% (95% CI, 75-96) vs. 98% (95% CI, 87-100); but not in specificity (P value > 0.05): 77% (95% CI, 50-92) vs. 82% (95% CI, 56-95). We observed a PPV of 91% (95% CI, 77-97) vs. 93% (95% CI, 81-98); and NPV of 72% (95%, 46-89) vs. 93% (95%, 66-100). SPECT and CTCA yielded higher diagnostic performance compared to traditional exercise bicycle testing for the detection and rule out of obstructive CAD in patients with stable angina.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.