ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2026
Diagnostic performance of coronary CTA versus exercise electrocardiography in acute chest pain: A propensity score-matched study in the emergency department.
Article in European journal of radiology open, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the clinical impact and operational efficiency of exercise electrocardiography (ex-ECG) and coronary CT angiography (CCTA) in the diagnostic-therapeutic care pathway of patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with acute chest pain (ACP) and suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study enrolled 428 consecutive patients presenting with ACP between January 2022 and December 2023. After propensity score matching (PSM) for age, sex, Heart Score, and triage code, two balanced groups of 214 patients each underwent either -ex-ECG or CCTA. Primary outcomes included diagnostic test positivity, hospital admission rate, and ED length-stay. Secondary outcomes included need for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and revascularization rates. Results: No statistically significant differences were found in test positivity (42 vs 31 patients, p = 0.157) or hospital admission rates (42 vs 30 patients, p = 0.121) between ex-ECG and CCTA groups. The ICA rates were similar (36 vs 32 patients, p = 0.597), as were revascularization rates (13 patients each, p = 1.000). However, discharged patients undergoing CCTA had significantly shorter total ED length-stay compared to ex-ECG (1710 vs 1841 min, p < 0.001), representing a 7.12 % reduction. Conclusion: Both ex-ECG and CCTA demonstrate comparable clinical impact and operational efficiency in patients with ACP and suspected NSTE-ACS. CCTA offers effective advantages with significantly reduced ED length-stay for a safe discharge of the patients, improving resource management without compromising diagnostic quality. These findings support the increasing adoption of CCTA in the diagnostic pathway for ACP and suspected NSTE-ACS in the ED setting.
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.