ArticleThe British journal of radiology2012
64-slice CT angiography for the detection of functionally significant coronary stenoses: comparison with stress myocardial perfusion imaging.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of coronary angiography using 64-slice computed tomography in coronary artery disease.Saudi medical journal · 2015Pooled it
- Intraoperative transit time flow measurements during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: The impact of coronary stenosis on competitive flow.Journal of cardiac surgery · 2022Article
- Influence of cardiac stress protocol on myocardial perfusion imaging accuracy: The role of exercise level on the evaluation of ischemic burden.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2016Article
- Very high coronary artery calcium score with normal myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging is associated with a moderate incidence of severe coronary artery disease.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the accuracy of 64-slice CT angiography (CTA) compared with single photon emission CT (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), which served as the reference standard, for the detection of functionally significant coronary artery disease (CAD).
methods141 consecutive patients (60 ± 10 years, 101 men) were investigated with 64-slice CTA and SPECT MPI; a subset of 35 patients had additional invasive coronary angiography (ICA). The data from CTA and ICA were compared with those from MPI for both cut-offs of ≥ 50% and ≥ 70% stenosis, respectively.
resultsThe sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of CTA, using a cut-off of ≥ 50% for significant stenosis, in detecting inducible perfusion defects on MPI were 96% [95% confidence interval (CI) 88-100%], 61% (95% CI 52-70%), 37% (95% CI 23-49%), 99% (95% CI 97-100%) and 68%, respectively, in patient-based analysis and 97% (95% CI 91-100%), 86% (95% CI 83-89%), 33% (95% CI 24-42%), 100% (95% CI 99-100%) and 87%, respectively, in vessel-based analysis. Applying a cut-off of ≥ 70% for significant stenosis, CTA yielded the following sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy for the detection of inducible MPI defects: by patient, 65% (95% CI 46-84%), 95% (95% CI 91-99%), 74% (95% CI 50-92%), 92% (95% CI 87-97%) and 89%, respectively; by vessel, 58% (95% CI 42-74%), 97% (95% CI 95-99%), 62% (95% CI 45-79%), 97% (95% CI 95-99%) and 95%, respectively.
conclusion64-slice CTA is a reliable tool to exclude functionally significant CAD when using a cut-off of ≥ 50% diameter stenosis. By contrast, a cut-off of ≥ 70% diameter narrowing is a strong predictor of ischaemia.
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.