Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29022741›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2018

Diagnostic accuracy of in-stent restenosis using model-based iterative reconstruction at coronary CT angiography: initial experience.

Fuminari Tatsugami, Toru Higaki, Hiroaki Sakane, Yuko Nakamura, Makoto Iida, Yasutaka Baba, Chikako Fujioka, Atsuhiro Senoo, Toshiro Kitagawa, Hideya Yamamoto and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Personalized 3D printed coronary models in coronary stenting.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2019
    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

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fuminari Tatsugami1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Toru Higaki1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Hiroaki Sakane1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Yuko Nakamura1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Makoto Iida1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Yasutaka Baba1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Chikako Fujioka2 Department of Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Atsuhiro Senoo3 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Toshiro Kitagawa3 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Hideya Yamamoto3 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Yasuki Kihara3 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Kazuo Awai1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University , Hiroshima, Japan.
Hiroshima University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of our study was to compare the diagnostic performance of coronary CT angiography (CTA) subjected to model-based iterative reconstruction (IR) or hybrid IR to rule out coronary in-stent restenosis.

methodsWe enrolled 16 patients who harboured 22 coronary stents. They underwent coronary CTA on a 320-slice CT scanner. The images were reconstructed with hybrid IR (AIDR 3D) and model-based IR (FIRST) algorithms. We calculated the stent lumen attenuation increase ratio and measured the visible stent lumen diameter. Two blinded observers visually graded the likelihood of in-stent restenosis (lesions ≥ 50%) on hybrid IR and FIRST images.

resultsThe stent lumen attenuation increase ratio on FIRST- was lower than on AIDR 3D images (0.20 vs 0.32). The ratio of the visible- compared to the true stent lumen diameter was higher on FIRST- than AIDR 3D images (52.5 vs 47.5%). Invasive coronary angiography identified five stents (22.7%) with significant in-stent restenosis. The use of FIRST improved the sensitivity (60 vs 100%), positive (75.0 vs 83.3%) and negative predictive value (88.9 vs 100%) and the accuracy (86.4 vs 95.5%) for the detection of in-stent restenosis. Specificity was 94.1% for both reconstruction methods.

conclusionThe model-based IR algorithm may improve diagnostic performance for the detection of in-stent restenosis. Advances in knowledge: Compared to hybrid IR, the new model-based IR algorithm reduced blooming artefacts and improved the image quality. It can be expected to improve diagnostic performance for the detection of in-stent restenosis on coronary CTA images.

Indexed as

Computed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyStentsAgedAlgorithmsCoronary RestenosisCoronary VesselsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultidetector Computed TomographyPredictive Value of TestsRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID29022741
PMCPMC5965776
OpenAlexW2761492210

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.