ArticleScientific reports2025
Coronary cross-sectional area stenosis severity determined using coronary CT highly correlated with coronary functional flow reserve: a pilot study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is the gold standard for assessing the physiological significance of coronary stenosis. We examined the potential correlation between digitally measured coronary cross-sectional area stenosis using coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography and FFR. We analyzed data of 32 consecutive patients with stenoses who underwent invasive FFR determination. The cross-sectional area was assessed using 128-slice coronary detector-based spectral CT angiography. Power analysis revealed that the sample size enabled the detection of an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.90. FFR ≤ 0.8 and > 0.8 were defined as FFR-positive and FFR-negative, respectively. Intra- and interobserver differences were negligible. Percentage cross-sectional area stenosis was calculated as 100 × (A-B)/A, where A is the cross-sectional area at non-stenotic pre-stenotic segment and B is the cross-sectional area of the most severe stenotic lesion. AUC indicated that percentage cross-sectional area stenosis effectively discriminated between FFR-positive and FFR-negative cases, yielding a sensitivity of 0.882 and specificity of 0.933 at a cutoff of 50% area reduction, with an AUC of 0.976. Lesions with less than 45% cross-sectional area stenosis on coronary CT angiography were not FFR-positive. When ROC analysis was conducted for lesion characteristics, AUC did not significantly improve. In conclusion, the percent coronary cross-sectional area stenosis measured using coronary CT angiography distinguished between FFR-positive and FFR-negative lesions with high accuracy. The severity of coronary cross-sectional area stenosis determined using CT angiography is clinically useful for predicting FFR.
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.