Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39639859›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2024

Coronary CT angiography: First comparison of model-based and hybrid iterative reconstruction with the reference standard invasive catheter angiography for CAD-RADS reporting.

Aiste Matuleviciute-Stojanoska, Julia Sautier, Verena Bauer, Martin Nuessel, Volha Nizhnikava, Christian Stumpf, Thorsten Klink

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of radiology open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Aiste Matuleviciute-StojanoskaInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Medical Campus Oberfranken, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen, Bayreuth, Germany.
Julia SautierInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Medical Campus Oberfranken, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen, Bayreuth, Germany.
Verena BauerDepartment of Cardiology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Medical Campus Oberfranken, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen, Bayreuth, Germany.
Martin NuesselInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Medical Campus Oberfranken, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen, Bayreuth, Germany.
Volha NizhnikavaDepartment of Radiology, Kantonsspital Graubuenden, Chur, Switzerland.
Christian StumpfDepartment of Cardiology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Medical Campus Oberfranken, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen, Bayreuth, Germany.
Thorsten KlinkInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum Bayreuth, Medical Campus Oberfranken, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen, Bayreuth, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare CCTA images generated using HIR and IMR algorithm with the reference standard ICA, and to determine to what extend further improvements of IMR over HIR can be expected. Methods: This retrospective study included 60 patients with low to intermediate CAD risk, who underwent coronary CTA (with HIR and IMR) and ICA. ICA was used as reference standard. Two independent and blinded readers evaluated 2226 segments, classifying stenosis with CAD-RADS (significant stenosis ≥3). Image quality was assessed with a 5-point scale, SNR in the ascending aorta, and FWHM of proximal LCA calibers. The impact of image noise, radiation dose, and BMI on diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using ROC curves and Fisher's Exact Test. Quantitative plaque analysis was performed on 28 plaques. Results: IMR showed higher image quality than HIR (IMR 4.4, HIR 3.97, p<0.001) with better SNR (21.4 vs. 13.28, p<0.001) and FWHM (4.44 vs. 4.55, p=0.003). IMR had better diagnostic accuracy (ROC AUC 0.967 vs. 0.948, p=0.16, performed better at higher radiation doses (p=0.02) and showed a larger minimum lumen area (p=0.022 and p=0.046). Conclusion: IMR offers significantly superior image quality of CCTA, more precise measurements, and a stronger positive correlation with ICA. The overall diagnostic accuracy may be superior with IMR, although the differences were not statistically significant. However, in patients who are exposed to higher radiation doses during CCTA due to their constitution, IMR enables significantly better diagnostic accuracy than HIR thus providing a specific benefit for obese patients.

Indexed as

Coronary CTADiagnostic accuracyHybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR)Iterative model-based reconstruction (IMR)ObesityPlaque analysis

Identifiers

PMID39639859
PMCPMC11617778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.