ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2020
Comparison of three-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound for detecting functionally significant coronary lesions.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Review
- Methods to evaluate vascular function: a crucial approach towards predictive, preventive, and personalised medicine.The EPMA journal · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThree-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA) can provide more accurate measurement of true vessel size and may be comparable to intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in identifying functionally significant coronary stenosis, as determined by fractional flow reserve (FFR). This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 3D-QCA for predicting FFR <0.8.
methodsWe assessed 175 lesions in 175 patients by FFR, IVUS, and 3D-QCA. Correlations between 3D-QCA values, IVUS values, and FFR values were analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate diagnostic accuracy of 3D-QCA for predicting FFR <0.8 and to determine the appropriate cut-off value.
resultsUpon evaluating 3D-QCA values, minimum lumen area (MLA) correlated with FFR value (r=0.48, P<0.001). Considering IVUS values, MLA correlated with FFR value (r=0.43, P<0.001). Also, 3D-QCA MLA was well correlated with IVUS MLA (r=0.61, P<0.001). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for 3D-QCA MLA was 0.77, and the best cut-off value was 2.37 (sensitivity: 73%, specificity: 71%). The AUC for IVUS MLA was 0.73, and the best cut-off value was 3.01 (sensitivity: 71%, specificity: 65%). There was no significant difference in AUC for 3D-MLA and IVUS-MLA (P=0.27).
conclusions3D-QCA is not inferior to IVUS for functional assessment of intermediate coronary lesions. We can consider 3D-QCA as a suitable substitute for IVUS or FFR in determining coronary intervention.
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.