ArticlePolish journal of radiology2022
Computed tomography independent quantitative determinants of CAD-RADS 4 versus CAD-RADS 3 for calcified coronary lesions.
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: An investigation of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)-derived quantitative parameters to determine CAD-RADS 4 versus CAD-RADS 3 of coronary lesions with moderate to severe calcification. Material and methods: The study included 150 coronary lesions proven to have moderate or severe stenosis by invasive coronary angiography and showing moderate to severe calcification in CCTA. Various CCTA-quantitative parameters were correlated to the degree of stenosis (moderately versus severely stenosed lesions). Their sensitivity and specificity to detect severe stenosis (supposed to be corresponding to CAD-RADS 4) were examined at multiple cut-off points. Results: The calcification remodelling index (CRI) was the only statistically significant independent computed tomo-graphy angiography-derived predictor of severe stenosis versus moderate stenosis on multivariate regression analysis. The best cut-off value was ≤ 0.84, with 77.78% sensitivity and 86.46% specificity. Conclusions: From all quantitative-derived CCTA parameters, CRI ≤ 0.84 was the predictor with the highest diagnostic performance for severe versus moderate stenosis in moderately to severely calcified coronary lesions. Accordingly, CRI can help to determine CAD-RADS 4 versus CAD-RADS 3.
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.