Trial reportScientific reports2018
Diagnostic yield and accuracy of coronary CT angiography after abnormal nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- CT Angiography Followed by Invasive Angiography in Patients With Moderate or Severe Ischemia-Insights From the ISCHEMIA Trial.JACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2021Trial
- Predictive Value of Lipoprotein(a) Combined with the Suita Score for High-Risk Plaque in Japanese Patients.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2026Article
- Developing an ML-Based Pretest Probability Model of Obstructive CAD in Patients With Stable Chest Pain.JACC. Asia · 2025Article
- Optimization of Retrospective Gated-ECG Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography by Dose Reduction in Patients with Different Body Mass Indexes.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Coronary Artery Disease Consortium Model and the Coronary Artery Calcium Score in Predicting Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in a Symptomatic Mixed Asian Cohort.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Article
- Coronary computed tomography angiography versus invasive coronary angiography: medical staff perceptions and diagnostic interest in Gaza-Palestine.Irish journal of medical science · 2021Article
- Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance as Pathophysiologic Tool in Diabetes Mellitus.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Review
- Machine learning of clinical variables and coronary artery calcium scoring for the prediction of obstructive coronary artery disease on coronary computed tomography angiography: analysis from the CONFIRM registry.European heart journal · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to determine the diagnostic yield and accuracy of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) in patients referred for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) based on clinical concern for coronary artery disease (CAD) and an abnormal nuclear stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) study. We enrolled 100 patients (84 male, mean age 59.6 ± 8.9 years) with an abnormal MPI study and subsequent referral for ICA. Each patient underwent CCTA prior to ICA. We analyzed the prevalence of potentially obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis) on CCTA and calculated the diagnostic accuracy of ≥50% stenosis on CCTA for the detection of clinically significant CAD on ICA (defined as any ≥70% stenosis or ≥50% left main stenosis). On CCTA, 54 patients had at least one ≥50% stenosis. With ICA, 45 patients demonstrated clinically significant CAD. A positive CCTA had 100% sensitivity and 84% specificity with a 100% negative predictive value and 83% positive predictive value for clinically significant CAD on a per patient basis in MPI positive symptomatic patients. In conclusion, almost half (48%) of patients with suspected CAD and an abnormal MPI study demonstrate no obstructive CAD on CCTA.
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.