Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30312411›Full record

Trial reportEuropean heart journal2018

Coronary computed tomography angiography for heart team decision-making in multivessel coronary artery disease.

Carlos Collet, Yoshinobu Onuma, Daniele Andreini, Jeroen Sonck, Giulio Pompilio, Saima Mushtaq, Mark La Meir, Yosuke Miyazaki, Johan de Mey, Oliver Gaemperli and 16 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European heart journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 116 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
27.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT02813473 completednot on this map

SYNTAX III REVOLUTION Trial: A Randomized Study to Evaluate the Feasibility of Heart-Team Clinical Decision Making Regarding the Optimal (Surgical or Percutaneous Based) Revascularization Strategy in Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease, Based on Non-invasive Coronary CT Angiography (CTA) Imaging Utilising High-definition GE RevolutionTM Multi-slice CT and HeartFlow FFRCT Compared to the Current Standard of Care With Conventional Invasive Coronary Angiography (CA)

TypeobservationalSponsorECRI bvRan2016 to 2018Enrolled223ConditionsCoronary Artery Diseases, Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease, Heart Diseases, Cardiovascular DiseasesArmsCoronary Angiography, Computed Tomography (CT) scan
NCT03901326 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of On-site CT-derived Fractional Flow Reserve on the Management Making for the Patients With Stable Chest Pain (TARGET Trial)

TypeinterventionalSponsorChinese PLA General HospitalRan2019 to 2022Enrolled1,216ConditionsCoronary Artery DiseaseArmsCT-FFR assessment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

116 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 242 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Quantitative flow ratio versus fractional flow reserve for Heart Team decision-making in multivessel disease: the randomised, multicentre DECISION QFR trial.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

26 authors at 14 institutions in 7 countries.

Carlos ColletDepartment of Cardiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Yoshinobu OnumaDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, GD Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Daniele AndreiniCentro Cardiologico Monzino, University of Milan, Via Carlo Parea, 4, Milano, Italy.
Jeroen SonckDepartment of Cardiology, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, Jette, Brussel, Belgium.
Giulio PompilioCentro Cardiologico Monzino, University of Milan, Via Carlo Parea, 4, Milano, Italy.
Saima MushtaqCentro Cardiologico Monzino, University of Milan, Via Carlo Parea, 4, Milano, Italy.
Mark La MeirDepartment of Cardiology, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 71, Zürich, Switzerland.
Yosuke MiyazakiDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, GD Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Johan de MeyDepartment of Radiology, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, Jette, Brussel, Belgium.
Oliver GaemperliDepartment of Cardiology, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 71, Zürich, Switzerland.
Ahmed OudaDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 71, Zürich, Switzerland.
Juan Pablo MaureiraDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, CHRU Nancy and University of Lorraine, Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre, Rue Charles Welche, Nancy, France.
Damien MandryDepartment of Radiology, CHRU Nancy and University of Lorraine, Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre, Rue Charles Welche, Nancy, France.
Edoardo CamenzindDepartment of Cardiology, CHRU Nancy and University of Lorraine, Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre, Rue Charles Welche, Nancy, France.
Laurent MacronDepartment of Cardiology, Centre cardiologique du nord, 36 Rue des Moulins Gémeaux, Saint-Denis, France.
Torsten DoenstDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, Fürstengraben 1, Jena, Germany.
Ulf TeichgräberDepartment of Radiology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, Fürstengraben 1, Jena, Germany.
Holger SiguschDepartment of Cardiology, Heinrich Braun Klinikum, Karl-Keil-Straße 35, Zwickau, Germany.
Taku AsanoDepartment of Cardiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Yuki KatagiriDepartment of Cardiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Marie-Angele MorelDepartment of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, GD Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Wietze LindeboomCardialysis BV, Westblaak 98, KM Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Gianluca PontoneCentro Cardiologico Monzino, University of Milan, Via Carlo Parea, 4, Milano, Italy.
Thomas F LüscherDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 71, Zürich, Switzerland.
Antonio L BartorelliCentro Cardiologico Monzino, University of Milan, Via Carlo Parea, 4, Milano, Italy.
Patrick W SerruysDepartment of Cardiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, Imperial College of London, Kensington, London, UK.
Centro Cardiologico Monzino · ITUniversité de Lorraine · FRUniversity of Zurich · CHCardialysis (Netherlands) · NLErasmus University Rotterdam · NLFriedrich Schiller University Jena · DEHarefield Hospital · GBUniversitair Ziekenhuis Brussel · BEAcademic Medical Center · NLCentre Cardiologique du Nord · FRKlinikum Braunschweig · DELuigi Sacco Hospital · ITUniversity of Amsterdam · NLVrije Universiteit Brussel · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) has emerged as a non-invasive diagnostic method for patients with suspected coronary artery disease, but its usefulness in patients with complex coronary artery disease remains to be investigated. The present study sought to determine the agreement between separate heart teams on treatment decision-making based on either coronary CTA or conventional angiography. Methods and results: Separate heart teams composed of an interventional cardiologist, a cardiac surgeon, and a radiologist were randomized to assess the coronary artery disease with either coronary CTA or conventional angiography in patients with de novo left main or three-vessel coronary artery disease. Each heart team, blinded for the other imaging modality, quantified the anatomical complexity using the SYNTAX score and integrated clinical information using the SYNTAX Score II to provide a treatment recommendations based on mortality prediction at 4 years: coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or equipoise between CABG and PCI. The primary endpoint was the agreement between heart teams on the revascularization strategy. The secondary endpoint was the impact of fractional flow reserve derived from coronary CTA (FFRCT) on treatment decision and procedural planning. Overall, 223 patients were included. A treatment recommendation of CABG was made in 28% of the cases with coronary CTA and in 26% with conventional angiography. The agreement concerning treatment decision between coronary CTA and conventional angiography was high (Cohen's kappa 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.91). The heart teams agreed on the coronary segments to be revascularized in 80% of the cases. FFRCT was available for 869/1108 lesions (196/223 patients). Fractional flow reserve derived from coronary CTA changed the treatment decision in 7% of the patients. Conclusion: In patients with left main or three-vessel coronary artery disease, a heart team treatment decision-making based on coronary CTA showed high agreement with the decision derived from conventional coronary angiography suggesting the potential feasibility of a treatment decision-making and planning based solely on this non-invasive imaging modality and clinical information. Trial registration number: NCT02813473.

Indexed as

Computed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary VesselsAgedClinical Decision-MakingCoronary Artery BypassFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPercutaneous Coronary Intervention

Identifiers

PMID30312411
PMCPMC6241466
OpenAlexW2896535407

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.