ArticleEuropean radiology2025
High-resolution deep learning reconstruction to improve the accuracy of CT fractional flow reserve.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative diagnostic performance and stability of deep learning- and CFD-based CT-FFR across vessels, cardiac phases, and centers.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of CT-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) using model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) and high-resolution deep learning reconstruction (HR-DLR) images to detect functionally significant stenosis with invasive FFR as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included 79 consecutive patients (mean age, 70 ± 11 [SD] years; 57 male) who underwent coronary CT angiography followed by invasive FFR between February 2022 and March 2024. CT-FFR was calculated using a mesh-free simulation. The cutoff for functionally significant stenosis was defined as FFR ≤ 0.80. CT-FFR was compared with MBIR and HR-DLR using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.
resultsThe mean invasive FFR value was 0.81 ± 0.09, and 46 of 98 vessels (47%) had FFR ≤ 0.80. The mean noise of HR-DLR was lower than that of MBIR (14.4 ± 1.7 vs 23.5 ± 3.1, p < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the diagnosis of functionally significant stenosis of HR-DLR (0.88; 95% CI: 0.80, 0.95) was higher than that of MBIR (0.76; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.86; p = 0.003). The diagnostic accuracy of HR-DLR (88%; 86 of 98 vessels; 95% CI: 80, 94) was higher than that of MBIR (70%; 69 of 98 vessels; 95% CI: 60, 79; p < 0.001).
conclusionsHR-DLR improves image quality and the diagnostic performance of CT-FFR for the diagnosis of functionally significant stenosis. KEY POINTS: Question The effect of HR-DLR on the diagnostic performance of CT-FFR has not been investigated. Findings HR-DLR improved the diagnostic performance of CT-FFR over MBIR for the diagnosis of functionally significant stenosis as assessed by invasive FFR. Clinical relevance HR-DLR would further enhance the clinical utility of CT-FFR in diagnosing the functional significance of coronary stenosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40402290What 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.