Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38193925›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2024

Fully automated artificial intelligence-based coronary CT angiography image processing: efficiency, diagnostic capability, and risk stratification.

Yaping Zhang, Yan Feng, Jianqing Sun, Lu Zhang, Zhenhong Ding, Lingyun Wang, Keke Zhao, Zhijie Pan, Qingyao Li, Ning Guo and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yaping Zhang *Radiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Yan Feng *Radiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Jianqing SunShukun (Beijing) Technology Co, Ltd, Jinhui Bd, Qiyang Rd, Beijing, 100102, China.
Lu ZhangRadiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Zhenhong DingShukun (Beijing) Technology Co, Ltd, Jinhui Bd, Qiyang Rd, Beijing, 100102, China.
Lingyun WangRadiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Keke ZhaoRadiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Zhijie PanRadiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Qingyao LiRadiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China.
Ning GuoShukun (Beijing) Technology Co, Ltd, Jinhui Bd, Qiyang Rd, Beijing, 100102, China.
Xueqian XieRadiology Department, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Haining Rd.100, Shanghai, 200080, China. xiexueqian@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6669-0097
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CNUniversity of Shanghai for Science and Technology · CN

Funding

Shanghai General Hospital Clinical Research Project CCTR-2022ZD01the National Natural Science Foundation of China 81971612
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo prospectively investigate whether fully automated artificial intelligence (FAAI)-based coronary CT angiography (CCTA) image processing is non-inferior to semi-automated mode in efficiency, diagnostic ability, and risk stratification of coronary artery disease (CAD). MATERIALS AND

methodsAdults with indications for CCTA were prospectively and consecutively enrolled at two hospitals and randomly assigned to either FAAI-based or semi-automated image processing using equipment workstations. Outcome measures were workflow efficiency, diagnostic accuracy for obstructive CAD (≥ 50% stenosis), and cardiovascular events at 2-year follow-up. The endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for unstable angina, and recurrence of cardiac symptoms. The non-inferiority margin was 3 percentage difference in diagnostic accuracy and C-index.

resultsIn total, 1801 subjects (62.7 ± 11.1 years) were included, of whom 893 and 908 were assigned to the FAAI-based and semi-automated modes, respectively. Image processing times were 121.0 ± 18.6 and 433.5 ± 68.4 s, respectively (p <0.001). Scan-to-report release times were 6.4 ± 2.7 and 10.5 ± 3.8 h, respectively (p < 0.001). Of all subjects, 152 and 159 in the FAAI-based and semi-automated modes, respectively, subsequently underwent invasive coronary angiography. The diagnostic accuracies for obstructive CAD were 94.7% (89.9-97.7%) and 94.3% (89.5-97.4%), respectively (difference 0.4%). Of all subjects, 779 and 784 in the FAAI-based and semi-automated modes were followed for 589 ± 182 days, respectively, and the C-statistic for cardiovascular events were 0.75 (0.67 to 0.83) and 0.74 (0.66 to 0.82) (difference 1%).

conclusionsFAAI-based CCTA image processing significantly improves workflow efficiency than semi-automated mode, and is non-inferior in diagnosing obstructive CAD and risk stratification for cardiovascular events. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Conventional coronary CT angiography image processing is semi-automated. This observation shows that fully automated artificial intelligence-based image processing greatly improves efficiency, and maintains high diagnostic accuracy and the effectiveness in stratifying patients for cardiovascular events. KEY POINTS: • Coronary CT angiography (CCTA) relies heavily on high-quality and fast image processing. • Full-automation CCTA image processing is clinically non-inferior to the semi-automated mode. • Full automation can facilitate the application of CCTA in early detection of coronary artery disease.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceComputed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRisk AssessmentWorkflowArtificial intelligenceComputed tomography angiographyCoronary artery diseaseDiagnosis

Identifiers

PMID38193925
OpenAlexW4391492148

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.