ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2020
Comparative effectiveness of coronary artery stenosis and atherosclerotic plaque burden assessment for predicting 30-day revascularization and 2-year major adverse cardiac events.
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 NCT00934037 (Multi Center Combined Non-invasive Coronary Angiography and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Using 320-Detector Computed Tomography), which is not on this 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.
Multi Center Combined Non-invasive Coronary Angiography and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Using 320-Detector Computed Tomography
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Value of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived plaque multiparameter analysis for guiding the management of intermediate coronary stenosis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Article
- Combination of coronary CT angiography, FFRClinical cardiology · 2023Article
- Introduction topical issue on CT plaque burden.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 15 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo provide comparative prognostic information of coronary atherosclerotic plaque volume and stenosis assessment in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).
methodsWe followed 372 patients with suspected or known CAD enrolled in the CORE320 study for 2 years after baseline 320-detector row cardiac CT scanning and invasive quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). CT images were analyzed for coronary calcium scanning (CACS), semi-automatically derived total percent atheroma volume (PAV), segment stenosis score (SSS), in addition to traditional stenosis assessment (≥ 50%) by CT and QCA for (1) 30-day revascularization and (2) major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to compare accuracy of risk prediction.
resultsSixty percent of patients had obstructive CAD by QCA with 23% undergoing 30-day revascularization and 9% experiencing MACE at 2 years. Most late events (20/32) were revascularization procedures. Prediction of 30-day revascularization was modest (AUC range 0.67-0.78) but improved after excluding patients with known CAD (AUC range 0.73-0.86, p < 0.05 for all). Similarly, prediction of MACE improved after excluding patients with known CAD (AUC range 0.58-0.73 vs. 0.63-0.77). CT metrics of atherosclerosis burden performed overall similarly but stenosis assessment was superior for predicting 30-day revascularization.
conclusionsAngiographic and coronary atherosclerotic plaque metrics perform only modestly well for predicting 30-day revascularization and 2-year MACE in high risk patients but improve after excluding patients with known CAD. Atherosclerotic plaque metrics did not yield incremental value over stenosis assessment for predicting events that predominantly consisted of revascularization procedures. CLINICAL
trial registrationNCT00934037.
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.