Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31628576›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2020

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of dual-axis rotational versus standard coronary angiography.

Zhi-Geng Jin, Rui Bai, Yi Li, Yong Yang, Wei Han, Qing Zhao, Lu Zhang, Hui-Liang Liu

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyEquivalence Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01776866 (Comparison of Image Content Assessment Between Dural-axis Rotational and Standard Coronary Angiography), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

NCT01776866 nacompletednot on this map

Comparison of Image Content Assessment Between Dural-axis Rotational and Standard Coronary Angiography

TypeinterventionalSponsorGeneral Hospital of Chinese Armed Police ForcesRan2013 to 2013Enrolled70ConditionsCoronary Artery DiseaseArmsCoronary Angiography
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Dual-axis rotational coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography: a randomized comparison.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2021
    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

8 authors.

Zhi-Geng JinDivision of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100039, China.
Rui BaiDivision of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100039, China.
Yi LiDivision of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100039, China.
Yong YangDivision of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100039, China.
Wei HanDivision of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100039, China.
Qing ZhaoDivision of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100039, China.
Lu ZhangDivision of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100039, China.
Hui-Liang LiuInstitute of Cardiology, The Third Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, No. 69, Yongding Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100039, China. liuhuiliang2003@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6677-184X

Funding

Capital Health Development Scientific Research Project 2014-2-5131
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The data about the accuracy of dual-axis rotational coronary angiography (DARCA) in detecting coronary artery disease (CAD) is scare. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of DARCA versus standard coronary angiography (SA). 70 patients with possible CAD underwent SA following by DARCA were prospectively enrolled. The primary endpoint was the non-inferiority comparison of the two modalities regarding diagnosis of CAD. Coronary lesion assessment, quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) analysis, and screening adequacy comparisons were performed. All images were analyzed by two independent reviewers except QCA analysis that was analyzed by the third independent reviewer. Radiation dose, contrast usage and procedural time were recorded. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT01776866. 63 of 70 patients were analyzed. DARCA was non-inferior to SA regarding the diagnosis of CAD (reviewer one-positive agreement: 100%, negative agreement: 100%, p = 1; p = 0.003 for non-inferiority; reviewer two-positive agreement: 96%, negative agreement: 95%, p = 1; p = 0.016 for non-inferiority). All reviewers showed good agreement between the two modalities for the diagnosis of CAD, coronary lesion assessment, QCA analysis, and screening adequacy, as reflected by kappa coefficients between 0.61 and 1.00. DARCA was associated with 41% reduction in radiation dose, 30% in contrast usage and 29% in procedure time (all p < 0.001). DARCA is clinically comparable to SA concerning the diagnostic accuracy for CAD, while markedly reduces radiation dose, contrast usage and procedure time.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBeijingCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary VesselsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesRadiation DosageContrast usageCoronary angiographyCoronary artery diseaseQuantitative coronary angiographyRadiation doseRotational coronary angiography

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.