ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2024
Diagnostic performance of deep learning to exclude coronary stenosis on CT angiography in TAVI patients.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of Fractional Flow Reserve from Coronary CT Angiography Using a Deep Learning-Based Algorithm: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Review of the Literature.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for Innovation in Interventional Cardiovascular Care.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence-enhanced detection of subclinical coronary artery disease in athletes: diagnostic performance and limitations.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the diagnostic performance of a deep-learning model (DLM) (CorEx®, Spimed-AI, Paris, France) designed to automatically detect > 50% coronary stenosis on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) images. We studied inter-observer variability as an additional aim. CCTA images obtained before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) were assessed by two radiologists and the DLM, and the results were compared to those of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) used as the reference standard. 165 consecutive patients underwent both CCTA and ICA as part of their TAVI work-up. We excluded the 42 (25.5%) patients with a history of stenting or bypass grafting and the 23 (13.9%) patients with low-quality images. We retrospectively subjected the CCTA images from the remaining 100 patients to evaluation by the DLM and compared the DLM and ICA results. All 25 patients with > 50% stenosis by ICA also had > 50% stenosis by DLM evaluation of CCTA: thus, the DLM had 100% sensitivity and 100% negative predictive value. False-positive DLM results were common, yielding a positive predictive value of only 39% (95% CI, 27-51%). Two radiologists with 3 and 25 years' experience, respectively, performed similarly to the DLM in evaluating the CCTA images; thus, accuracy did not differ significantly between each reader and the DLM (p = 0.625 and p = 0.375, respectively). The DLM had 100% negative predictive value for > 50% stenosis and performed similarly to experienced radiologists. This tool may hold promise for identifying the up to one-third of patients who do not require ICA before TAVI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38461472What 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.