Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35965817›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022

Diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography derived fractional flow reserve (CTFFR) in patients with coronary artery calcification: insights from multi-center experiments in China.

Ying Tao, Yulong Gao, Xiangyu Wu, Yutong Cheng, Xianliang Yan, Yun Gao, Yuqi Liu, Yida Tang, Zhizhong Li

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ying TaoDepartment of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yulong GaoDepartment of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xiangyu WuDepartment of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yutong ChengDepartment of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xianliang YanDepartment of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yun GaoDepartment of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yuqi LiuShenzhen Escope Technology Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China.
Yida TangDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zhizhong LiDepartment of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Beijing Anzhen Hospital · CNCapital Medical University · CNPeking University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is affected by calcification artifacts, which reduces its diagnostic efficacy. CT-derived fractional flow reserve (CTFFR) based on CCTA has been proven to be accurate in the diagnosis of non-calcified patients, but its clinical use in patients with calcified coronary artery disease remains to be investigated. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of coronary artery calcification on CTFFR. Methods: CCTA, coronary angiography, and FFR were performed on 128 patients in three clinical medical centers. Local investigators performed an assessment of stenosis for CCTA and the core laboratory performed the CTFFR calculations. CTFFR ≤0.8 and diameter stenosis ≥50% for CCTA was identified as lesion-specific ischemia. The diagnostic performance of CTFFR in identifying the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy was analyzed using an invasive FFR ≤0.8 as the gold standard. We compared the diagnostic performances between CTFFR and CCTA according to the level of calcification. We divided patients into four groups based on the coronary artery calcification score [coronary artery calcification score (CACS) =0, >0 to <100, ≥100 to <400, and ≥400]. Results: The Youden index indicated an optimal threshold of 0.80 for CTFFR to identify functionally ischemic lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for CTFFR on a per-patient basis were 90% (80-96%), 98% (92-99%), 94% (89-97%), 98% (91-99%), 92% (83-97%), and 96.9% (94.2-99.6%), respectively. Compared to CCTA, CTFFR had a higher specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV, and AUC in both the low to intermediate calcification group and the high calcification group. The diagnostic efficacy of CTFFR was higher than that of CCTA without the influence of calcification. Conclusions: This Chinese multi-center study showed that CTFFR based on novel computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling demonstrated very high diagnostic efficacy compared to the invasive measurement of FFR in all lesions suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Of particular note are the high specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of CTFFR, even in patients with calcification, which were significantly better than previous CCTA assessments.

Indexed as

computed tomography angiography (CTA)coronary artery calcificationCT-derived fractional flow reserve (CTFFR)

Identifiers

PMID35965817
PMCPMC9372659
OpenAlexW4288494251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.