Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26382844›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2016

Image quality, radiation dose, and diagnostic accuracy of prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch coronary CT angiography at 70 kVp in a clinical setting: comparison with invasive coronary angiography.

Long Jiang Zhang, Yining Wang, U Joseph Schoepf, Felix G Meinel, Richard R Bayer, Li Qi, Jian Cao, Chang Sheng Zhou, Yan E Zhao, Xie Li and 3 more

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

13 authors.

Long Jiang ZhangDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China. kevinzhlj@163.com.
Yining WangDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
U Joseph SchoepfDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China.
Felix G MeinelDivision of Cardiovascular Imaging, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Richard R BayerDivision of Cardiovascular Imaging, Medical University of South Carolina, Ashley River Tower, MSC 226, 25 Courtenay Dr, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Li QiDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China.
Jian CaoDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Chang Sheng ZhouDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China.
Yan E ZhaoDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China.
Xie LiDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China.
Jian Bin GongDepartment of Cardiology, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China.
Zhengyu JinDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China. jin_zhengyu@163.com.
Guang Ming LuDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, China. cjr.luguangming@vip.163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate image quality, radiation dose, and diagnostic performance of prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch coronary CT angiography (CCTA) at 70 kVp compared to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as reference standard. MATERIALS AND

methodsForty-three patients underwent prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch CCTA at 70 kVp using 30 cc (11 g iodine) contrast medium and ICA. Subjective and objective image quality was evaluated for each CCTA study. CCTA performance for diagnosing ≥50% stenosis was assessed. Results were stratified according to heart rate (HR), body mass index (BMI), Agatston score, and image quality.

resultsAt CCTA, 94.3% (500/530) of coronary segments were of diagnostic quality. Using ICA as reference standard, sensitivity and accuracy were 100% and 93.0% on a per-patient basis. Per-vessel and per-segment performances were 92.2% and 89.5%; 79.5% and 88.3%, respectively. No differences were found in diagnostic accuracy between different HR, BMI, and calcification subgroups (all P > 0.05) on a per-patient basis. However, low image quality reduced diagnostic accuracy on a per-patient, per-vessel and per-segment basis (all P < 0.05). The mean effective radiation dose was 0.2 ± 0.0 mSv.

conclusionOur presented protocol results in an effective radiation dose of 0.2 mSv and high diagnostic accuracy for stenosis detection in a selected, non-obese population. KEY POINTS: Prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch CCTA at 70 kVp is feasible. This protocol has a high diagnostic accuracy for stenosis detection. The mean effective radiation dose was 0.2 ± 0.0 mSv. Only 30 cc of contrast material is used in this protocol. Low image quality reduced diagnostic accuracy of CCTA.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBody Mass IndexContrast MediaCoronary AngiographyCoronary StenosisElectrocardiographyFemaleHeartHeart RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiation DosageContrast MediaCoronary CT angiographyHigh-pitch acquisitionLow contrast mediumLow kilovoltageProspective ECG gating

Identifiers

PMID26382844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.