ArticleHeart and vessels2023
Deep learning-based coronary computed tomography analysis to predict functionally significant coronary artery stenosis.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence based fractional flow reserve.Cardiology journal · 2025Review
- Advancements in Cardiac CT Imaging: The Era of Artificial Intelligence.Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fractional flow reserve derived from coronary CT (FFR-CT) is a noninvasive physiological technique that has shown a good correlation with invasive FFR. However, the use of FFR-CT is restricted by strict application standards, and the diagnostic accuracy of FFR-CT analysis may potentially be decreased by severely calcified coronary arteries because of blooming and beam hardening artifacts. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of deep learning (DL)-based coronary computed tomography (CT) data analysis in predicting invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR), especially in cases with severely calcified coronary arteries. We analyzed 184 consecutive cases (241 coronary arteries) which underwent coronary CT and invasive coronary angiography, including invasive FFR, within a three-month period. Mean coronary artery calcium scores were 963 ± 1226. We evaluated and compared the vessel-based diagnostic accuracy of our proposed DL model and a visual assessment to evaluate functionally significant coronary artery stenosis (invasive FFR < 0.80). A deep neural network was trained with consecutive short axial images of coronary arteries on coronary CT. Ninety-one coronary arteries of 89 cases (48%) had FFR-positive functionally significant stenosis. On receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis to predict FFR-positive stenosis using the trained DL model, average area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC curve was 0.756, which was superior to the AUC of visual assessment of significant (≥ 70%) coronary artery stenosis on CT (0.574, P = 0.011). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), and accuracy of the DL model and visual assessment for detecting FFR-positive stenosis were 82 and 36%, 68 and 78%, 59 and 48%, 87 and 69%, and 73 and 63%, respectively. Sensitivity and NPV for the prediction of FFR-positive stenosis were significantly higher with our DL model than visual assessment (P = 0.0004, and P = 0.024). DL-based coronary CT data analysis has a higher diagnostic accuracy for functionally significant coronary artery stenosis than visual assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37552271What 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.