ReviewDer Radiologe2020
[Computed tomography or cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of chronic coronary syndrome?]
Review in Der Radiologe, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in cardiac diagnostics-how to choose the right modality : A guide based on the new guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
- [Cardiovascular consequences of smoking : Imaging overview].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNoninvasive imaging modalities are of central importance in the diagnosis of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) in the current guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), while the role of primary invasive coronary angiography in this context is increasingly being questioned. This review provides a summary of the most important diagnostic strategies from the radiology perspective. METHODOLOGICAL ISSUE: The diagnostic algorithm is guided by the pretest probability (PTP) for the presence of CCS, which can be estimated based on age, sex, and symptoms. It is important to note that PTP in the current guidelines has decreased significantly compared to older recommendations and this change has an impact on the selection of the most appropriate imaging technique. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL
methodsIn patients with low PTP (>5% and <15%) and without prediagnosed coronary artery disease (CAD), CCS can be safely ruled out with inconspicuous computed tomography angiogram (CTA) of the coronary vessels. In patients with increased PTP (>15%) or prediagnosed CAD, noninvasive functional imaging should be primarily used to detect ischemia. PERFORMANCE AND METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: The excellent sensitivity (89%), specificity (87%) and high prognostic relevance make stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging the functional method of first choice. Technical innovations and the use of artificial intelligence-based methods for image analysis could contribute to further improve its accuracy in the future. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Radiologists should be aware of the recommendations of the current guidelines and work towards the establishment of coronary CTA and stress perfusion CMR in clinical routine.
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.