ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2021
Combined coronary CT angiography with plain scan for diagnosis of ruptured plaque: comparison with optical coherence tomography.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2021. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived plaque features in the diagnosis of optical coherence tomography-defined vulnerable plaques.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Atherosclerosis evaluation and cardiovascular risk estimation using coronary computed tomography angiography.European heart journal · 2024Review
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
To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of CCTA + plain scan for ruptured plaques, with optical coherence tomography (OCT) as the reference, and to provide preliminary analysis of influential factors. Patients who underwent CCTA and OCT were retrospectively enrolled. The diagnostic standards for ruptured plaque on CCTA + plain scan were ulcer or intra-plaque dye penetration on CCTA, and a careful review of images from the plain scans to ensure areas of them were not calcification. The diagnosis of ruptured plaque was made by OCT. Total 65 patients with 71 plaques were included. There were 40 OCT-confirmed ruptured plaques in 38 patients and 31 OCT-confirmed non-ruptured plaques in 27 patients. CCTA + plain scan identified 27 ruptured plaques in 27 patients and 28 non-ruptured plaques in 24 patients. With OCT as the gold standard, the per-patient sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of CCTA + plain scan for diagnosing ruptured plaque were 71%, 89%, 90%, 69%, and 78%, and there was good agreement (Kappa = 0.70) between CCTA + plain scan and OCT. Among 13 false negative ruptured plaques, 2 had calcifications close to the rupture, and the cavity depth in the remaining 11 was 0.46 ± 0.17 mm, versus 0.98 ± 0.26 mm in 27 true positive ruptured plaques (P < 0.01). CCTA + plain scan may identify morphological features of ruptured plaques. The cavity depth of the ruptured plaques and calcification at the rupture site seem major factors influencing the diagnostic accuracy for plaque rupture. Future perspective studied are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.
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.