ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2013
Hybrid CT angiography and quantitative 15O-water PET for assessment of coronary artery disease: comparison with quantitative coronary angiography.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Performance of Hybrid Cardiac Imaging Methods for Assessment of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease Compared With Stand-Alone Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: A Meta-Analysis.JACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2018Pooled it
- Hybrid cardiovascular imaging. A clinical consensus statement of the european association of nuclear medicine (EANM) and the european association of cardiovascular imaging (EACVI) of the ESC.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Review
- Danish study of Non-Invasive Testing in Coronary Artery Disease 3 (Dan-NICAD 3): study design of a controlled study on optimal diagnostic strategy.Open heart · 2023Article
- Clinical significance of corrected relative flow reserve derived fromJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- Hybrid anatomo-functional imaging of coronary artery disease: Beneficial irrespective of its core components.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019Review
- 15-O-water myocardial flow reserve PET and CT angiography by full hybrid PET/CT as a potential alternative to invasive angiography.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2018Article
- Label-free imaging of atherosclerotic plaques using third-harmonic generation microscopy.Biomedical optics express · 2018Article
- Myocardial perfusion imaging with PET.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2017Review
- How to reconstruct dynamic cardiac PET data?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017Article
- Clinical Utility and Future Applications of PET/CT and PET/CMR in Cardiology.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2016Review
- Article
- Multimodality Imaging in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.Current cardiovascular imaging reports · 2014Review
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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCT angiography (CTA) can rule out significant stenoses with a very high reliability, whereas its ability to confirm significant stenoses is suboptimal. In contrast, measurements of myocardial blood flow (MBF) provide information on the haemodynamic consequences of stenoses. Therefore, a combination of the two might improve diagnostic accuracy. We conducted a head-to-head comparison of CTA, measurement of MBF by (15)O-water PET, and hybrid PET/CTA for the detection of significant coronary artery stenoses.
methodsThe study group comprised 44 outpatients scheduled for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) with an intermediate pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease. The patients underwent 64-slice CTA and baseline and hyperaemic PET before ICA with quantitative coronary angiography analysis.
resultsOn a per-patient basis, the negative predictive values (NPV; 95% confidence intervals in parentheses) were 88 % (64 - 97%) for CTA, 90% (71 - 97%) for PET and 92% (74 - 98%) for PET/CTA, and the positive predictive values (PPV) were 71% (53 - 85%) for CTA, 87% (68 - 95%) for PET and 100% (84 - 100%) for PET/CTA. Similarly, on a per-vessel basis the NPVs (which were generally high) were 97% (94 - 100%) for CTA, 95 % (90 - 99%) for PET and 97% (95 - 100%) for PET/CTA, and the PPVs (which were lower, but higher with PET/CTA) were 53% (39 - 66%) for CTA, 53 % (40 - 66%) for PET and 85 % (73 - 97%) for PET/CTA. In six patients, CTA analysis was hampered by the presence of severe calcifications. However, with the addition of the PET data, all six patients were correctly categorized.
conclusionCardiac quantitative hybrid PET/CTA imaging has better diagnostic accuracy than CTA alone and PET alone. CTA has a suboptimal PPV, suggesting that hybrid PET/CTA imaging should be used to assess the significance of coronary stenoses diagnosed by CTA.
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.