Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37099368›Full record

ArticleJMIR cardio2023

Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence-Based Automated Quantitative Coronary Angiography Compared to Intravascular Ultrasound: Retrospective Cohort Study.

In Tae Moon, Sun-Hwa Kim, Jung Yeon Chin, Sung Hun Park, Chang-Hwan Yoon, Tae-Jin Youn, In-Ho Chae, Si-Hyuck Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cardio, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Artificial Intelligence in Coronary Artery Interventions: Preprocedural Planning and Procedural Assistance.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

8 authors.

In Tae MoonUijeongbu Eulji University Hospital, Uijeongbu, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3847-0150
Sun-Hwa KimSeoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4673-6430
Jung Yeon ChinUijeongbu Eulji University Hospital, Uijeongbu, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2093-7629
Sung Hun ParkUijeongbu Eulji University Hospital, Uijeongbu, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3279-3864
Chang-Hwan YoonSeoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6305-4442
Tae-Jin YounSeoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4628-9503
In-Ho ChaeSeoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1644-2105
Si-Hyuck KangSeoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4755-6367

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn accurate quantitative analysis of coronary artery stenotic lesions is essential to make optimal clinical decisions. Recent advances in computer vision and machine learning technology have enabled the automated analysis of coronary angiography.

objectiveThe aim of this paper is to validate the performance of artificial intelligence-based quantitative coronary angiography (AI-QCA) in comparison with that of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).

methodsThis retrospective study included patients who underwent IVUS-guided coronary intervention at a single tertiary center in Korea. Proximal and distal reference areas, minimal luminal area, percent plaque burden, and lesion length were measured by AI-QCA and human experts using IVUS. First, fully automated QCA analysis was compared with IVUS analysis. Next, we adjusted the proximal and distal margins of AI-QCA to avoid geographic mismatch. Scatter plots, Pearson correlation coefficients, and Bland-Altman were used to analyze the data.

resultsA total of 54 significant lesions were analyzed in 47 patients. The proximal and distal reference areas, as well as the minimal luminal area, showed moderate to strong correlation between the 2 modalities (correlation coefficients of 0.57, 0.80, and 0.52, respectively; P<.001). The correlation was weaker for percent area stenosis and lesion length, although statistically significant (correlation coefficients of 0.29 and 0.33, respectively). AI-QCA tended to measure reference vessel areas smaller and lesion lengths shorter than IVUS did. Systemic proportional bias was not observed in Bland-Altman plots. The biggest cause of bias originated from the geographic mismatch of AI-QCA with IVUS. Discrepancies in the proximal or distal lesion margins were observed between the 2 modalities, which were more frequent at the distal margins. After the adjustment of proximal or distal margins, there was a stronger correlation of proximal and distal reference areas between AI-QCA and IVUS (correlation coefficients of 0.70 and 0.83, respectively).

conclusionsAI-QCA showed a moderate to strong correlation compared with IVUS in analyzing coronary lesions with significant stenosis. The main discrepancy was in the perception of the distal margins by AI-QCA, and the correction of margins improved the correlation coefficients. We believe that this novel tool could provide confidence to treating physicians and help in making optimal clinical decisions.

Indexed as

AIangiographyartificial intelligenceautomated analysiscomputer visioncoronarycoronary angiographycoronary stenosisinterventional ultrasonographymachine learningstenosis

Identifiers

PMID37099368
PMCPMC10173041

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.