ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Machine learning-based prediction of insufficient contrast enhancement in coronary computed tomography angiography.
Article in European radiology, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Test-bolus peak attenuation for predicting aortic enhancement in coronary computed tomography angiography: an exploratory subgroup analysis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Radiological Cardiovascular Imaging-A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Novel intravascular tantalum oxide-based contrast agent achieves improved vascular contrast enhancement and conspicuity compared to Iopamidol in an animal multiphase CT protocol.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPatient-tailored contrast delivery protocols strongly reduce the total iodine load and in general improve image quality in CT coronary angiography (CTCA). We aim to use machine learning to predict cases with insufficient contrast enhancement and to identify parameters with the highest predictive value.
methodsMachine learning models were developed using data from 1,447 CTs. We included patient features, imaging settings, and test bolus features. The models were trained to predict CTCA images with a mean attenuation value in the ascending aorta below 400 HU. The accuracy was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) and precision-recall curves (AUPRC). Shapley Additive exPlanations was used to assess the impact of features on the prediction of insufficient contrast enhancement.
resultsA total of 399 out of 1,447 scans revealed attenuation values in the ascending aorta below 400 HU. The best model trained using only patient features and CT settings achieved an AUROC of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.73-0.83) and AUPRC of 0.65 (95% CI: 0.58-0.71). With the inclusion of the test bolus features, it achieved an AUROC of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.81-0.87), an AUPRC of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.76), and a sensitivity of 0.66 and specificity of 0.88. The test bolus' peak height was the feature that impacted low attenuation prediction most.
conclusionPrediction of insufficient contrast enhancement in CT coronary angiography scans can be achieved using machine learning models. Our experiments suggest that test bolus features are strongly predictive of low attenuation values and can be used to further improve patient-specific contrast delivery protocols. KEY POINTS: • Prediction of insufficient contrast enhancement in CT coronary angiography scans can be achieved using machine learning models. • The peak height of the test bolus curve is the most impacting feature for the best performing model.
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.