ArticlePloS one2017
Clinical evaluation of new automatic coronary-specific best cardiac phase selection algorithm for single-beat coronary CT angiography.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimization of acquisition phase and acquisition time window of coronary artery CT angiography with different heart rates based on prospective ECG-gating.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Cardiovascular computed tomography in cardiovascular disease: An overview of its applications from diagnosis to prediction.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2024Article
- Reducing both radiation and contrast doses in coronary CT angiography in lean patients on a 16-cm wide-detector CT using 70 kVp and ASiR-V algorithm, in comparison with the conventional 100-kVp protocol.European radiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the workflow efficiency of a new automatic coronary-specific reconstruction technique (Smart Phase, GE Healthcare-SP) for selection of the best cardiac phase with least coronary motion when compared with expert manual selection (MS) of best phase in patients with high heart rate. A total of 46 patients with heart rates above 75 bpm who underwent single beat coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) were enrolled in this study. CCTA of all subjects were performed on a 256-detector row CT scanner (Revolution CT, GE Healthcare, Waukesha, Wisconsin, US). With the SP technique, the acquired phase range was automatically searched in 2% phase intervals during the reconstruction process to determine the optimal phase for coronary assessment, while for routine expert MS, reconstructions were performed at 5% intervals and a best phase was manually determined. The reconstruction and review times were recorded to measure the workflow efficiency for each method. Two reviewers subjectively assessed image quality for each coronary artery in the MS and SP reconstruction volumes using a 4-point grading scale. The average HR of the enrolled patients was 91.1±19.0bpm. A total of 204 vessels were assessed. The subjective image quality using SP was comparable to that of the MS, 1.45±0.85 vs 1.43±0.81 respectively (p = 0.88). The average time was 246 seconds for the manual best phase selection, and 98 seconds for the SP selection, resulting in average time saving of 148 seconds (60%) with use of the SP algorithm. The coronary specific automatic cardiac best phase selection technique (Smart Phase) improves clinical workflow in high heart rate patients and provides image quality comparable with manual cardiac best phase selection. Reconstruction of single-beat CCTA exams with SP can benefit the users with less experienced in CCTA image interpretation.
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.