ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2015
Computed tomography segmental calcium score (SCS) to predict stenosis severity of calcified coronary lesions.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cardiovascular imaging 2015 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2016Review
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 estimate the probability of ≥ 50% coronary stenoses based on computed tomography (CT) segmental calcium score (SCS) and clinical factors. The Institutional Review Board approved the study. A training sample of 201 patients underwent CT calcium scoring and conventional coronary angiography (CCA). All patients consented to undergo CT before CCA after being informed of the additional radiation dose. SCS and calcification morphology were assessed in individual coronary segments. We explored the predictive value of patient's symptoms, clinical history, SCS and calcification morphology. We developed a prediction model in the training sample based on these variables then tested it in an independent test sample. The odds ratio (OR) for ≥ 50% coronary stenosis was 1.8-fold greater (p = 0.006) in patients with typical chest pain, twofold (p = 0.014) greater in patients with acute coronary syndromes, twofold greater (p < 0.001) in patients with prior myocardial infarction. Spotty calcifications had an OR for ≥ 50% stenosis 2.3-fold (p < 0.001) greater than the absence of calcifications, wide calcifications 2.7-fold (p < 0.001) greater, diffuse calcifications 4.6-fold (p < 0.001) greater. In middle segments, each unit of SCS had an OR 1.2-fold (p < 0.001) greater than in distal segments; in proximal segments the OR was 1.1-fold greater (p = 0.021). The ROC curve area of the prediction model was 0.795 (0.95 confidence interval 0.602-0.843). Validation in a test sample of 201 independent patients showed consistent diagnostic performance. In conjunction with calcification morphology, anatomical location, patient's symptoms and clinical history, SCS can be helpful to estimate the probability of ≥ 50% coronary stenosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26369642What 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.