ReviewCurrent cardiovascular imaging reports2017
Cardiac CT Improves Outcomes in Stable Coronary Heart Disease: Results of Recent Clinical Trials.
Review in Current cardiovascular imaging reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- CT coronary angiography in the lipid clinic: a pilot study and lipidologist survey.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- Point-of-care ultrasound can make the difference in patients with heart failure at primary care.Family practice · 2025Article
- Implementation of a national AI technology program on cardiovascular outcomes and the health system.Nature medicine · 2025Observational
- Validation of the commercial coronary computed tomographic angiography artificial intelligence for coronary artery stenosis: a cross-sectional study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Ten things to know about ten imaging studies: A preventive cardiology perspective ("ASPC top ten imaging").American journal of preventive cardiology · 2021Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: From Anatomy to Prognosis.BioMed research international · 2020Review
- A model-guided method for improving coronary artery tree extractions from CCTA images.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2019Article
- Real-world clinical utility and impact on clinical decision-making of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: lessons from the ADVANCE Registry.European heart journal · 2018Article
- FFRInterventional cardiology (London, England) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this study was to review the recent randomised controlled trials of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for patients with stable coronary artery disease. RECENT
findingsThe initial results and subsequent papers from the SCOT-HEART (Scottish COmputed Tomography of the HEART) and PROMISE (PROspective Multicentre Imaging Study for Evaluation of chest pain) trials have shown that CCTA is a safe and appropriate addition to standard care or alternative to functional testing. The SCOT-HEART study showed that CCTA changes diagnoses, improves diagnostic certainty, changes management, leads to more appropriate use of invasive coronary angiography, and reduces fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction. A meta-analysis of the four randomised controlled trials showed that CCTA leads to a major reduction in myocardial infarction in patients with stable chest pain. SUMMARY: CCTA is now an established technique for the assessment of coronary artery disease. Recent 'test and treat' randomised controlled trials have shown that CCTA guided changes in management can improve clinical outcomes.
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.