ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2015
Comparison of two dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (2D-QCA) with optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the assessment of coronary artery lesion dimensions.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Invasive validation of novel 1D models for computation of coronary fractional flow reserve.Cardiovascular research · 2025Article
- Optical coherence tomography versus intravascular ultrasound in patients with myocardial infarction: a diagnostic performance study of pre-percutaneous coronary interventions.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2020Article
- Safety and efficacy of frequency-domain optical coherence tomography in evaluating and treating intermediate coronary lesions.World journal of cardiology · 2018Article
- Patient-Specific Computational Models of Coronary Arteries Using Monoplane X-Ray Angiograms.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThere is limited data on how well 2D-QCA and OCT agree with each other for measurement of coronary artery lumen dimensions. We aimed to assess the agreement between the two modalities.
methodsPatients undergoing OCT for assessment of coronary artery lesions were reviewed. Minimum luminal diameter (MLD), proximal reference diameter and distal reference diameter were measured for each lesion prior to stenting.
resultsOCT was performed in 64 patients and 40 lesions were suitable for analysis. There was a good correlation for proximal and distal reference diameters (r = 0.86, p < 0.0001 and r = 0.92, p < 0.0001 respectively). There was good agreement on Bland-Altman analysis; the proximal and distal reference diameters measured by QCA were on average 0.09 mm (95% CI, - 0.52 to 0.53 mm) and 0.1 mm (95% CI, - 0.59 to 0.6 mm) smaller than OCT respectively. There was a satisfactory correlation (r = 0.63, p = < 0.0001) between QCA and OCT for MLD. However, the MLD by QCA was 0.49 mm (95% CI, - 1.57 to 0.59 mm) smaller than OCT, suggesting a poor agreement for MLD.
conclusionsThere is a good correlation and agreement between QCA and OCT for measurement of proximal and distal reference diameters. However, the MLD was underestimated by QCA.
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.