Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35192010›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2022

Diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography for the evaluation of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Marco Gatti, Guglielmo Gallone, Vittoria Poggi, Francesco Bruno, Alessandro Serafini, Alessandro Depaoli, Ovidio De Filippo, Federico Conrotto, Fatemeh Darvizeh, Riccardo Faletti and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Percutaneous coronary intervention for calcified and resistant lesions.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Time to Go with the Flow in Coronary Artery Disease in TAVR?Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marco GattiDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy. marcogatti17@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8168-5280
Guglielmo GalloneDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Vittoria PoggiDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Francesco BrunoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Alessandro SerafiniDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Alessandro DepaoliDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Ovidio De FilippoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Federico ConrottoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Fatemeh DarvizehSchool of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20121, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo FalettiDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Gaetano Maria De FerrariDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Paolo FonioDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Radiology Unit, University of Turin, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Fabrizio D'AscenzoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medical Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
University of Turin · ITDepartment of Medical Sciences · BYVita-Salute San Raffaele University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for the evaluation of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

methodsEMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, and CENTRAL were searched for studies reporting accuracy of CCTA for the evaluation of obstructive CAD compared with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the reference standard. QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias. A bivariate random effects model was used to analyze, pool, and plot the diagnostic performance measurements across studies. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive ( + LR) and negative (-LR) likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and hierarchical summary ROC curve (HSROC) were evaluated. Prospero registration number: CRD42021252527.

resultsFourteen studies (2533 patients) were included. In the intention-to-diagnose patient-level analysis, sensitivity and specificity for CCTA were 97% (95% CI: 94-98%) and 68% (95% CI: 56-68%), respectively, and + LR and -LR were 3.0 (95% CI: 2.1-4.3) and 0.05 (95% CI: 0.03 - 0.09), with DOR equal to 60 (95% CI: 30-121). The area under the HSROC curve was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.98). No significant difference in sensitivity was found between single-heartbeat and other CT scanners (96% (95% CI: 90 - 99%) vs. 97% (95% CI: 94-98%) respectively; p = 0.37), whereas the specificity of single-heartbeat scanners was higher (82% (95% CI: 66-92%) vs. 60% (95% CI: 46 - 72%) respectively; p < 0.0001). Routine CCTA in the pre-TAVI workup could save 41% (95% CI: 34 - 47%) of ICAs if a disease prevalence of 40% is assumed.

conclusionsCCTA proved an excellent diagnostic accuracy for assessing obstructive CAD in patients referred for TAVI; the use of single-heartbeat CT scanners can further improve these findings. KEY POINTS: • CCTA proved to have an excellent diagnostic accuracy for assessing obstructive CAD in patients referred for TAVI. • Routine CCTA in the pre-TAVI workup could save more than 40% of ICAs. • Single-heartbeat CT scanners had higher specificity than others in the assessment of obstructive CAD in patients referred for TAVI.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseCoronary StenosisTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementComputed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyHumansTomography, X-Ray ComputedAortic valve stenosisComputed tomography angiographyCoronary artery diseaseTranscatheter aortic valve replacement

Identifiers

PMID35192010
PMCPMC9279258
OpenAlexW4212853409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.