ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Cardiac Computed Tomography in Monitoring Revascularization.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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.
- Bioresorbable Scaffolds for Coronary Revascularization: From Concept to Clinical Maturity.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Cardiovascular Aging and Risk Assessment: How Multimodality Imaging Can Help.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in the setting of stable coronary artery disease is highly recommended for low-risk patients. High-risk patients, such as symptomatic subjects with prior revascularization, are suggested to be investigated with noninvasive functional tests or invasive coronary angiography. CCTA is not considered for these patients because of some well-known CCTA artifacts, such as blooming and motion artifacts. However, new technology has allowed us to obtain images with high spatial resolution, overcoming these well-known limitations of CCTA. Furthermore, the introduction of CT-derived fractional flow reserve and stress CT perfusion has made CCTA a comprehensive examination, including anatomical and functional assessments of coronary plaques. Additionally, CCTA allows for plaque characterization, which has become a cornerstone for the optimization of medical therapy, which is not possible with functional tests. Recent evidence has suggested that CCTA could be used with the aim of monitoring revascularization, both after coronary bypass grafts and percutaneous coronary intervention. With this background information, CCTA can also be considered the exam of choice in subjects with a history of revascularization. The availability of a noninvasive anatomic test for patients with previous coronary revascularization and its possible association with functional assessments in a single exam could play a key role in the follow-up management of these subjects, especially considering the rate of false-positive and negative results of noninvasive functional tests. The present review summarizes the main evidence about CCTA and coronary artery bypass grafts, complex percutaneous coronary intervention, and bioresorbable stent implantation.
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.