Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40338329›Full record

ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026

Observer variabilities for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease using anatomical and functional testing: the impact of certification.

Grigorios Korosoglou, Nadine Abanador-Kamper, Christian Tesche, Matthias Renker, Florian André, Loris Weichsel, Michaela Hell, Florian Bönner, Mareike Cramer, Sebastian Kelle and 6 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Stress CMR versus SPECT for the detection of coronary artery disease: meta-analysis and implications for the German healthcare.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026
    Article
  3. 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

16 authors.

Grigorios Korosoglou *Department of Cardiology, Vascular Medicine and Pneumology, GRN Hospital Weinheim, Roentgenstr. 1, 69469, Weinheim, Germany. gkorosoglou@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6038-2253
Nadine Abanador-Kamper *Heart Center Wuppertal, Witten/Herdecke University, Wuppertal, Germany.
Christian TescheDepartment of Cardiology, Munich University Clinic, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Matthias RenkerDepartment of Cardiology, Campus Kerckhoff of the Justus Liebig University Giessen, Bad Nauheim, Germany.
Florian AndréDepartment of Cardiology, Angiology and Pneumology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Loris WeichselDepartment of Cardiology, Vascular Medicine and Pneumology, GRN Hospital Weinheim, Roentgenstr. 1, 69469, Weinheim, Germany.
Michaela HellDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Florian BönnerDepartment of Cardiology, Pulmonology, and Vascular Medicine, Krankenhaus Düren, Düren, Germany.
Mareike CramerDepartment of Cardiology, Pulmonology, and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Sebastian KelleDZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jeanette Schulz-MengerCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, ECRC Experimental and Clinical Research Center, Charité, Berlin, Germany.
Wolfgang FehskeClinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Andreas RolfDepartment of Cardiology, Campus Kerckhoff of the Justus Liebig University Giessen, Bad Nauheim, Germany.
Norbert FreyDepartment of Cardiology, Angiology and Pneumology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Holger ThieleHeart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig and Leipzig Heart Science, Leipzig, Germany.
Stephan BaldusClinic III for Internal Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare the reproducibility in reporting of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) or cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) by certified readers for CCTA and CMR by the German Society of Cardiology (DGK) versus that by non-certified readers.

methodsThe study included 40 randomly selected CCTA and vasodilator stress CMR patient datasets. For CCTA, the degree of lumen narrowing, plaque composition, and high-risk plaque features were assessed. For CMR, wall motion and perfusion abnormalities and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) were rated. All measures were conducted by segments and for individual patients. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess agreement between non-certified (n = 4) vs. DGK-certified readers (n = 4).

resultsICC for assessment of luminal narrowing, plaque composition, and high-risk features were, respectively, 0.65 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.59-0.69), 0.64 (95%CI 0.45-0.80), and 0.45 (95%CI 0.22-0.66) for non-certified versus 0.78 (95%CI 0.74-0.81), 0.88 (95%CI 0.79-0.93), and 0.89 (95%CI 0.81-0.95) for DGK-certified readers (p < 0.001 for all). ICC for the assessment of wall motion, perfusion, and LGE were, respectively, 0.41 (95%CI 0.35-0.48), 0.27 (95%CI 0.18-0.38), and 0.48 (95%CI 0.41-0.54) for non-certified versus 0.71 (95%CI 0.67-0.75), 0.71 (95%CI 0.67-0.75) and 0.67 (95%CI 0.62-0.71) for DGK-certified readers (p < 0.001 for all). The agreement was excellent among DGK-certified readers for obstructive CAD (≥ 70% lumen narrowing) assessed by CCTA and high for abnormal perfusion and for LGE by CMR in a per-patient analysis (0.88; 95%CI 0.79-0.94 and 0.84; 95%CI 0.71-0.92), respectively.

conclusionSubstantially better CCTA and CMR reporting was observed for DGK-certified cardiologists, who achieved high agreement for diagnosing the presence or absence of obstructive CAD by CCTA and abnormal perfusion by CMR. Since important clinical decisions may be based on these readings, our data support quality-controlled education programs for advanced cardiac imaging.

Indexed as

CertificationComputed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseCoronary VesselsMagnetic Resonance Imaging, CineAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsCoronary artery diseaseIntraclass correlationLate gadolinium enhancementMyocardial perfusion imagingNon-calcified plaquePlaque quantification

Identifiers

PMID40338329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.