ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Comparative analysis of photon-counting and energy-integrating detector CT to identify obstructive coronary artery disease.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Photon counting detector CT contrast agent-reduced transcatheter aortic valve reconstruction planning: a comparative study.European radiology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Performance of Photon-Counting CT Angiography in Vascular Stenosis Assessment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the patient-, vessel- and segment-based diagnostic performance of photon-counting detector CT (PCD-CT) compared to energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT) for detecting ≥ 50% or ≥ 70% stenosis using invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as a reference standard. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with stable chest pain and ≥ 50% stenosis detected on dual source PCD-CT who subsequently underwent ICA were prospectively enroled. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for PCD-CT vs ICA and additionally for a patient cohort scanned with EID-CT with similar risk profiles and disease prevalence. A Monte Carlo simulation based on diagnostic accuracy parameters was performed to estimate the potential reduction in ICA referrals.
resultsA total of 143 patients (66 ± 9 years, 27.3% female) with 572 vessels and 2431 segments were evaluated with PCD-CT and ICA. Regarding EID-CT, 109 patients (65 ± 9 years, 31.0% female), 436 vessels and 1853 segments were assessed, with every patient undergoing ICA. PCD-CT demonstrated significantly higher accuracy than EID-CT in detecting ≥ 50% stenosis: 88.1% vs 77.9% (patient level), 91.6% vs 77.8% (vessel level), and 97.7% vs 92.4% (segment level) (p < 0.01 for all). For detecting ≥ 70% stenosis, PCD-CT also showed higher accuracy than EID-CT: 90.9% vs 70.6% (patient level), 94.6% vs 80.9% (vessel level), and 98.6% vs 94.1% (segment level) (p < 0.01 for all). We demonstrated a potential mean reduction of 14.8% in ICA referrals when utilising PCD-CT compared to EID-CT.
conclusionsPCD-CT provides improved per-patient, per-vessel and per-segment diagnostic performance in detecting obstructive CAD in symptomatic patients when compared to patients scanned on EID-CT. PCD-CT may lead to a significant decrease in ICA utilisation. KEY POINTS: Question Accurate coronary CT angiography guides treatment, but its diagnostic accuracy is limited by various factors. Findings Photon counting detector (PCD)-CT improved diagnostic performance in detecting ≥ 50% or ≥ 70% stenosis, potentially reducing unnecessary ICA referrals by 14.8%. Clinical relevance PCD-CT improves diagnostic accuracy over EID-CT and may reduce unnecessary ICA.
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.