ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Coronary Artery Tree Description and Lesion Evaluation (CatLet) score for functional evaluation of coronary stenosis: a comparison study with pressure wire fractional flow reserve.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical value of Lipoprotein(a) combined with CatLet coronary score in predicting adverse events after emergency PCI for AMI patients.PloS one · 2026Article
- A scoring system combining CatLet score and clinical variables as a predictor of long-term prognosis in patients with chronic coronary syndrome after percutaneous coronary intervention.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Prognostic value of angiography-derived fractional flow reserve and translesion gradient after drug-coated balloon angioplasty.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pressure wire fractional flow reserve (FFR) and its derivatives, such as quantitative flow ratio (QFR), computational pressure flow-derived FFR (caFFR), coronary angiography-derived FFR (FFR Methods: We retrospectively enrolled consecutive patients with stable coronary artery disease. They attended Sichuan Science City Hospital with at least one lesion of 50-90% diameter stenosis in a coronary artery of 2 mm or larger. FFR measurement was obtained during invasive coronary angiography. The CatLet score was obtained by multiplying a fixed value of 2.0 (for non-occlusive lesions) and the weight of the affected coronary artery. The primary endpoint was the CatLet score's diagnostic accuracy in identifying hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis, with a pressure wire FFR of ≤0.80 being used as reference. Results: We analyzed the FFR and CatLet scores from 206 vessels in 175 patients with stable coronary disease and intermediate coronary lesions. The per-vessel analysis revealed an overall good correlation between the CatLet score and the FFR [r=-0.61; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -0.69 to -0.52; P<0.01]. We also noted a significant CatLet score-FFR correlation for each of the left anterior descending artery (LAD), left circumflex (LCX), and right coronary artery (RCA). With a CatLet score ≥10 as a predictor of FFR ≤0.80, the overall diagnostic accuracy included a sensitivity of 78.80% (95% CI: 67.00-87.90%), a specificity of 85.00% (95% CI: 78.00-90.50%), a positive likelihood ratio of 5.25, a negative likelihood ratio of 0.25, and an area under the curve of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85-0.94). Equivalent vessel-specific results were also achieved for each of the LAD, LCX, and RCA. Conclusions: The CatLet score, solely based on visual estimation of the results of coronary angiography, demonstrated good diagnostic performance with respect to myocardial ischemia. Its clinical values in guiding revascularization warrant further investigation.
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.