Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40843653›Full record

ArticleInvestigative radiology2026

Deep Learning-based Automated Coronary Plaque Quantification: First Demonstration With Ultra-high Resolution Photon-counting Detector CT at Different Temporal Resolutions.

Konstantin Klambauer, Silvan Daniel Burger, Tristan Thorben Demmert, Victor Mergen, Lukas Jakob Moser, Mehmet Akif Gulsun, Max Schöbinger, Chris Schwemmer, Michael Wels, Thomas Allmendinger and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative radiology, 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. Article
  2. Review
  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

13 authors.

Konstantin Klambauer
Silvan Daniel Burger
Tristan Thorben Demmert
Victor Mergen
Lukas Jakob Moser
Mehmet Akif Gulsun
Max Schöbinger
Chris Schwemmer
Michael Wels
Thomas Allmendinger
Matthias Eberhard
Bernhard Schmidt

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and reproducibility of a novel deep learning (DL)-based coronary plaque quantification tool with automatic case preparation in patients undergoing ultra-high resolution (UHR) photon-counting detector CT coronary angiography (CCTA), and to assess the influence of temporal resolution on plaque quantification. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this retrospective single-center study, 45 patients undergoing clinically indicated UHR CCTA were included. In each scan, 2 image data sets were reconstructed: one in the dual-source mode with 66 ms temporal resolution and one simulating a single-source mode with 125 ms temporal resolution. A novel, DL-based algorithm for fully automated coronary segmentation and intensity-based plaque quantification was applied to both data sets in each patient. Plaque volume quantification was performed at the vessel-level for the entire left anterior descending artery (LAD), left circumflex artery (CX), and right coronary artery (RCA), as well as at the lesion-level for the largest coronary plaque in each vessel. Diameter stenosis grade was quantified for the coronary lesion with the greatest longitudinal extent in each vessel. To assess reproducibility, the algorithm was rerun 3 times in 10 randomly selected patients, and all outputs were visually reviewed and confirmed by an expert reader. Paired Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with Benjamini-Hochberg correction were used for statistical comparisons.

resultsOne hundred nineteen out of 135 (88.1%) coronary arteries showed atherosclerotic plaques and were included in the analysis. In the reproducibility analysis, repeated runs of the algorithm yielded identical results across all plaque and lumen measurements ( P > 0.999). All outputs were confirmed to be anatomically correct, visually consistent, and did not require manual correction. At the vessel level, total plaque volumes were higher in the 125 ms reconstructions compared with the 66 ms reconstructions in 28 of 45 patients (62%), with both calcified and noncalcified plaque volumes being higher in 32 (71%) and 28 (62%) patients, respectively. Total plaque volumes in the LAD, CX, and RCA were significantly higher in the 125 ms reconstructions (681.3 vs. 647.8  mm 3 , P  < 0.05). At the lesion level, total plaque volumes were higher in the 125 ms reconstructions in 44 of 45 patients (98%; 447.3 vs. 414.9  mm 3 , P  < 0.001), with both calcified and noncalcified plaque volumes being higher in 42 of 45 patients (93%). The median diameter stenosis grades for all vessels were significantly higher in the 125 ms reconstructions (35.4% vs. 28.1%, P  < 0.01).

conclusionsThis study evaluated a novel DL-based tool with automatic case preparation for quantitative coronary plaque in UHR CCTA data sets. The algorithm was technically robust and reproducible, delivering anatomically consistent outputs not requiring manual correction. Reconstructions with lower temporal resolution (125 ms) systematically overestimated plaque burden compared with higher temporal resolution (66 ms), underscoring that protocol standardization is essential for reliable DL-based plaque quantification.

Indexed as

Computed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseDeep LearningPlaque, AtheroscleroticRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedAgedAlgorithmsFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studiescoronary CT angiographycoronary plaque quantificationdeep learningphoton-counting detector CTtemporal resolutionultra-high resolution

Identifiers

PMID40843653
PMCPMC13045810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.