Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38177617›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2024

Ultra-high-resolution photon-counting detector CT in evaluating coronary stent patency: a comparison to invasive coronary angiography.

Muhammad Taha Hagar, Martin Soschynski, Ruben Saffar, Moisés Felipe Molina-Fuentes, Jakob Weiss, Alexander Rau, Christopher Schuppert, Philipp Ruile, Sebastian Faby, David Schibilsky and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Cardiac imaging using photon counting CT - benefits, challenges and prospects.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Muhammad Taha Hagar *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany. taha.hagar@uniklinik-freiburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9826-2372
Martin Soschynski *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Ruben SaffarDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Moisés Felipe Molina-FuentesDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Jakob WeissDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Alexander RauDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Christopher SchuppertDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Philipp RuileDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Freiburg Heart Centre, Freiburg, Germany, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Sebastian FabyComputed Tomography, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Forchheim, 91301, Germany.
David SchibilskyDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Freiburg University, Freiburg, Germany.
Constantin von Zur MuehlenDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Freiburg Heart Centre, Freiburg, Germany, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Christopher L SchlettDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Fabian BambergDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
Tobias KraussDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Straße 55, Freiburg im Breisgau, 79106, Germany.
University of Freiburg · DESiemens Healthineers (Germany) · DE

Funding

Forum Gesundheitsstandort Baden-Württemberg 35-4223.10/20
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-high-resolution photon-counting detector CT angiography (UHR PCD-CTA) for evaluating coronary stent patency compared to invasive coronary angiography (ICA).

methodsConsecutive, clinically referred patients with prior coronary stent implantation were prospectively enrolled between August 2022 and March 2023 and underwent UHR PCD-CTA (collimation, 120 × 0.2 mm). Two radiologists independently analyzed image quality of the in-stent lumen using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 ("excellent") to 5 ("non-diagnostic"), and assessed all coronary stents for the presence of in-stent stenosis (≥ 50% lumen narrowing). The diagnostic accuracy of UHR PCD-CTA was determined, with ICA serving as the standard of reference.

resultsA total of 44 coronary stents in 18 participants (mean age, 83 years ± 6 [standard deviation]; 12 women) were included in the analysis. In 3/44 stents, both readers described image quality as non-diagnostic, whereas reader 2 noted a fourth stent to have non-diagnostic image quality. In comparison to ICA, UHR PCD-CTA demonstrated a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 100% (95% CI [confidence interval] 47.8, 100), 92.3% (95% CI 79.1, 98.4), and 93.2% (95% CI 81.3, 98.6) for reader 1 and 100% (95% CI 47.8, 100), 87.2% (95% CI 72.6, 95.7), and 88.6% (95% CI 75.4, 96.2) for reader 2, respectively. Both readers observed a 100% negative predictive value (36/36 stents and 34/34 stents). Stent patency inter-reader agreement was 90.1%, corresponding to a substantial Cohen's kappa value of 0.72.

conclusionsUHR PCD-CTA enables non-invasive assessment of coronary stent patency with high image quality and diagnostic accuracy. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Ultra-high-resolution photon-counting detector CT angiography represents a reliable and non-invasive method for assessing coronary stent patency. Its high negative predictive value makes it a promising alternative over invasive coronary angiography for the rule-out of in-stent stenosis. KEY POINTS: • CT-based evaluation of coronary stent patency is limited by stent-induced artifacts and spatial resolution. • Ultra-high-resolution photon-counting detector CT accurately evaluates coronary stent patency compared to invasive coronary angiography. • Photon-counting detector CT represents a promising method for the non-invasive rule-out of in-stent stenosis.

Indexed as

Computed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographySensitivity and SpecificityStentsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMalePhotonsProspective StudiesComputed tomography angiographyCoronary artery diseaseStentsVascular patency

Identifiers

PMID38177617
PMCPMC11213791
OpenAlexW4390589488

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.