Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39380628›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024

Diagnostic utility of coronary artery calcium score percentiles and categories to exclude abnormal scans and relevant ischemia in rubidium positron emission tomography.

Simon M Frey, Gabrielle Huré, Jan-Philipp Leibfarth, Kathrin Thommen, Melissa Amrein, Klara Rumora, Ibrahim Schäfer, Federico Caobelli, Damian Wild, Philip Haaf and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Simon M FreyDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Gabrielle HuréCardiovascular Research Institute Basel (CRIB), University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Jan-Philipp LeibfarthCardiovascular Research Institute Basel (CRIB), University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Kathrin ThommenDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Melissa AmreinCardiovascular Research Institute Basel (CRIB), University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Klara RumoraCardiovascular Research Institute Basel (CRIB), University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Ibrahim SchäferCardiovascular Research Institute Basel (CRIB), University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Federico CaobelliDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Damian WildDivision of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Philip HaafDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Christian E MuellerDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Michael J ZellwegerDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite clinical suspicion, most non-invasive ischemia tests for coronary artery disease (CAD) reveal unremarkable results. Patients with a coronary artery calcium score (CACS) of zero rarely have an abnormal positron emission tomography (PET) and could be deferred from further testing. However, most patients have some extent of coronary calcification. Objectives: CACS percentiles could be useful to exclude abnormal perfusion in patients with CACS >0, but data from patients with Methods: Consecutive patients with suspected CAD ( Results: The mean age was 65 ± 11 years, 43% were female, and typical angina was reported in 21%. Abnormal PET/relevant ischemia (>10%) were observed in 19.8%/9.3%. Overall, the sensitivity/negative predictive value (NPV) of a <25th percentile CACS to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia were 93.0%/95.7% and 98.2%/99.5%, respectively. The sensitivity/NPV of CACS 1-9 to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia were 96.0%/91.8% and 97.6%/97.6%, respectively. Except for patients <50 years old, sensitivity for abnormal PET was >90.9% in all age groups. Conclusion: In patients >50 years, the <25th percentile and CACS 1-9 had good test characteristics to rule out abnormal PET and relevant ischemia (>10%). They could be used to extend the scope of application of CACS 0 by 8%-10% to 32%-34% overall of patients who could be deferred from further testing.

Indexed as

coronary artery calcium score (CACS)coronary artery disease (CAD)gatekeeperischemiapatient stratificationpercentilepositron emission tomography (PET)

Identifiers

PMID39380628
PMCPMC11460730

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.