ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2025
Diagnostic Performance of Dynamic Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Using Third-Generation Dual-Source Computed Tomography in Patients with Intermediate Pretest Probability of Coronary Artery Disease.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of combined coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and dynamic CT myocardial perfusion imaging (CT-MPI) for detecting hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with intermediate pretest probability. (2) Methods: Patients with an intermediate pretest probability of CAD were retrospectively enrolled. All patients underwent CCTA and dynamic CT-MPI using a third-generation dual-source CT scanner prior to invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Anatomically significant stenosis was defined as ≥50% luminal narrowing on both CCTA and ICA. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) was performed during ICA in selected cases. Hemodynamically significant CAD was defined per vessel as FFR ≤ 0.80, angiographic stenosis ≥70%, or having undergone revascularization. The diagnostic performance of CCTA alone and CCTA combined with CT-MPI was compared against this reference standard. (3) Results: Seventy-four patients (mean age, 66.8 ± 11.1 years; 59 men) were included. The median coronary calcium score was 508.5 Agatston units (interquartile range: 147-1173). ICA and CCTA detected anatomically significant stenoses in 137 (61.7%) and 146 (65.8%) coronary vessels, respectively, and in 62 (83.8%) and 71 (95.9%) patients, respectively. Hemodynamically significant stenosis was present in 56 patients (76%) and 99 vessels (45%). On a per-vessel basis, CCTA alone yielded a sensitivity of 96.7%, specificity of 60.3%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 64.4%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.1%. Combined CCTA and CT-MPI demonstrated a sensitivity of 90.1%, specificity of 84.3%, PPV of 82.7%, and NPV of 91.1%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve improved from 0.787 (95% confidence interval: 0.73-0.84) for CCTA to 0.872 (95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.91) for the combined approach (
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.