ArticleKorean circulation journal2022
Nationwide Trends of Gatekeeper to Invasive Coronary Angiography in Suspected Coronary Artery Disease.
Article in Korean circulation journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Large Language Models Versus Human Readers in CAD-RADS 2.0 Categorization of Coronary CT Angiography Reports.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Korean Society of Interventional Cardiology Expert Consensus for the Management of Chronic Coronary Syndrome: Part 1.Korean circulation journal · 2026Review
- Reporting trends and clinical impact of high-risk coronary plaques on cardiac CT angiography in CAD-RADS.European radiology · 2026Article
- Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction and the role of cardiovascular imaging: systemic review and opinion paper from the Working Group on Cardio-Oncology of the Korean Society of Cardiology.Journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024Review
- Practical Approach for Angina and Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries: A State-of-the-Art Review.Korean circulation journal · 2023Review
- Clinical Utility of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography, Beyond the Gatekeeper for Invasive Coronary Angiography.Korean circulation journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesReal-world trends in the utility and type of gatekeeping studies in invasive coronary angiography (ICA) requires further investigation.
methodsWe identified outpatients who underwent noninvasive cardiac tests or directly ICA for suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) from the nationwide Korea Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service-National Patient Sample database between 2012 and 2018.
resultsAmong 71,401 patients, the percentage of patients who were evaluated for suspected CAD was 34.7% for treadmill test (TMT), 4.2% for single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), 24.2% for coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), 1.6% for multiple gatekeepers, and 32.3% for directly ICA without noninvasive studies. The proportion of CCTA as a gatekeeper showed linear increase, (18.6% in 2012 and 28.8% in 2018; p<0.001), while those of TMT, SPECT, and direct ICA have decreased (p<0.001, p=0.03, and p<0.001, respectively). The overall incidence of downstream ICA after gatekeeper was 13.8% (6,662/48,346), and SPECT showed higher ICA rate in pairwise comparison with TMT and CCTA (p<0.001). Patients who performed gatekeepers before ICA showed higher rate of subsequent PCI (34.7% vs. 32.3%; p<0.001) and CABG (3.5% vs. 1.0%; p<0.001), compared to those who directly underwent ICA, and CCTA was associated with higher revascularization rate after ICA in pairwise comparison with TMT and SPECT (p<0.001).
conclusionsNationwide database demonstrated that CCTA is utilized increasingly as a gatekeeper for ICA and is associated with high revascularization rate after ICA in outpatients with 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.