ArticleJACC. Advances2024
Coronary Artery Stenosis and High-Risk Plaque Assessed With an Unsupervised Fully Automated Deep Learning Technique.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: A Bibliometric Analysis of Trends and Themes.Clinical cardiology · 2026Review
- Inherited risk of coronary artery disease: redefining care with imaging and genetics.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2026Review
- 3D Convolutional Neural Network for Predicting Clinical Outcome from Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography in Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-based Automated Coronary Plaque Quantification: First Demonstration With Ultra-high Resolution Photon-counting Detector CT at Different Temporal Resolutions.Investigative radiology · 2026Article
- Region guided mask R-CNN with Haralick ResNet fusion for accurate coronary artery disease detection in computed tomography angiography images.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Plaque Progression and Rupture in Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: A Review of Current Imaging Modalities.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Fully automated, deep learning, cardiac CT-based multimodal network for cardiovascular risk stratification in high-risk perioperative patients.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Computer-Aided Detection in Endovascular Interventions: Clinical Applications, Validation, and Translational Perspectives.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Innovations In Artificial Intelligence-Guided Atherosclerosis Cardiovascular Imaging: From Detection to Prognosis.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
- CAD-RADS: A Standardized Reporting System for Coronary CT Angiography.Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2026Review
- Development and validation of deep learning model for detection of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with acute chest pain: a multi-center study.La Radiologia medica · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in coronary CT angiography: transforming the diagnosis and risk stratification of atherosclerosis.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Review
- Computed Tomography Advancements in Plaque Analysis: From Histology to Comprehensive Plaque Burden Assessment.Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) · 2025Review
- A systematic review on deep learning-enabled coronary CT angiography for plaque and stenosis quantification and cardiac risk prediction.European journal of radiology open · 2025Article
- AI in Cardiology: Improving Outcomes for All.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Evolution or Revolution?: AI in Coronary CT Evaluation.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Revolutionizing Cardiology through Artificial Intelligence-Big Data from Proactive Prevention to Precise Diagnostics and Cutting-Edge Treatment-A Comprehensive Review of the Past 5 Years.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
Abstract
Background: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has emerged as a reliable noninvasive modality to assess coronary artery stenosis and high-risk plaque (HRP). However, CCTA assessment of stenosis and HRP is time-consuming and requires specialized training, limiting its clinical translation. Objectives: The aim of this study is to develop and validate a fully automated deep learning system capable of characterizing stenosis severity and HRP on CCTA. Methods: A deep learning system was trained to assess stenosis and HRP on CCTA scans from 570 patients in multiple centers. Stenosis severity was categorized as >0%, 1 to 49%, ≥50%, and ≥70%. HRP was defined as low attenuation plaque (≤30 HU), positive remodeling (≥10% diameter), and spotty calcification (<3 mm). The model was then tested on 769 patients (3,012 vessels) for stenosis severity and 45 patients (325 vessels) for HRP. Results: Our deep learning system achieved 93.5% per-vessel agreement within 1 Coronary Artery Disease-Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) category for stenosis. Diagnostic performance for per-vessel stenosis was very good for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve with: >0% stenosis: 90.6%, 88.8%, 83.4%, 93.9%, 89.7%, respectively; ≥50% stenosis: 87.1%, 92.3%, 60.9%, 98.1%, 89.7%, respectively. Similarly, the per-vessel HRP feature achieved very good diagnostic performance with an area under the curve of 0.80, 0.79, and 0.77 for low attenuation plaque, spotty calcification, and positive remodeling, respectively. Conclusions: A fully automated unsupervised deep learning system can rapidly evaluate stenosis severity and characterize HRP with very good diagnostic performance on CCTA.
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.