Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23964289›Full record

ArticleKorean circulation journal2013

Physiologic assessment of coronary artery disease by cardiac computed tomography.

Minisha Kochar, James K Min

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Korean circulation journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Minisha KocharDivision of Cardiology, Kaiser Permanente, Panorama City, CA, USA.
James K Min
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center · USKaiser Permanente · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the leading cause of death and morbidity worldwide. To date, diagnostic evaluation of patients with suspected CAD has relied upon the use of physiologic non-invasive testing by stress electrocardiography, echocardiography, myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and magnetic resonance imaging. Indeed, the importance of physiologic evaluation of CAD has been highlighted by large-scale randomized trials that demonstrate the propitious benefit of an integrated anatomic-physiologic evaluation method by performing lesion-specific ischemia assessment by fractional flow reserve (FFR)-widely considered the "gold" standard for ischemia assessment-at the time of invasive angiography. Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) has emerged as an attractive non-invasive test for anatomic illustration of the coronary arteries and atherosclerotic plaque. In a series of prospective multicenter trials, CCTA has been proven as having high diagnostic performance for stenosis detection as compared to invasive angiography. Nevertheless, CCTA evaluation of obstructive stenoses is prone to overestimation of severity and further, detection of stenoses by CCTA does not reliably determine the hemodynamic significance of the visualized lesions. Recently, a series of technological innovations have advanced the possibility of CCTA to enable physiologic evaluation of CAD, thereby creating the potential of this test to provide an integrated anatomic-physiologic assessment of CAD. These advances include rest-stress MPI by CCTA as well as the use of computational fluid dynamics to non-invasively calculate FFR from a typically acquired CCTA. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most recent data addressing these 2 physiologic methods of CAD evaluation by CCTA.

Indexed as

Coronary artery diseaseMultiditector computed tomographyPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID23964289
PMCPMC3744730
OpenAlexW1975265395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.