ReviewCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2020
Updated diagnostic & prognostic paradigm for CAD: a narrative review.
Review 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Radiologist as a Gatekeeper in Chest Pain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular diseases are the first cause of death globally; early detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) is a challenge for clinicians and radiologists. Over the past 2 decades there have been several improvements in the methods for the assessment of diagnosis and prognosis in patients with suspected CAD; most of these methods are imaging methods and they operate with high-end technologies. Cardiac computed tomography (CCT) as we know it today was introduced in 1998 and has ever progressed with constant pace. The first decade was the technical validation phase of the method while the second decade was the clinical validation phase. CCT has developed an excellent diagnostic and prognostic value; technological development together with radiation dose reduction, contributed to the widening of its clinical indications. The diagnostic value of CCT is particularly important as a first line in symptomatic patients with suspected obstructive CAD and low-to-intermediate cardiovascular risk. It is a test that should come, whenever possible, in front of functional evaluation because of its very high sensitivity and negative predictive value. The prognostic value of CCt is still investigational, even though it is becoming quite evident that the atherosclerotic phenotype plays a major role in the determination of prognosis, and as consequence, in the individualization of optimal pharmacological therapy, especially in the cohort without significant obstructive CAD. Recently, scientific and practical guidelines have been updated taking into account the role of CCT, which is able to provide a reliable and fast diagnosis with an additional resources optimization. Multiple registries and trials have been developed and will be summarized in this review. Recent guidelines highlighted the role of CCT in diagnosing suspected CAD.
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.