ArticleScientific reports2026
Discordance in diagnostic assessment of Achilles tendon thickening between soft X-ray radiography and ultrasonography among patients with coronary artery disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Achilles tendon (AT) xanthomas are characteristic manifestations of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Although soft X-ray radiography (XR) and ultrasonography (US) are used to assess AT thickness, data comparing their diagnostic concordance are limited. We evaluated the correlation and diagnostic agreement between XR and US in measuring AT thickness in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. We prospectively enrolled CAD patients undergoing AT thickness measurement by XR and US between April 2024 and March 2025. AT thickening was defined according to the 2022 Japan Atherosclerosis Society guideline (XR: ≥8/7.5 mm [male/female], US: ≥ 6/5.5 mm [male/female]). Among 262 patients (14 [5.3%] clinically diagnosed FH), median AT thickness by XR was greater than that by US (7.0 [IQR 6.3-7.6] mm vs. 5.8 [IQR 5.1-6.1] mm, P < 0.001). XR and US measurements were significantly correlated (r = 0.632, P < 0.001). The concordance rate for AT thickening was 83.2% and the discordance (16.8%) was primarily due to XR-/US+ cases (14.9%). In conclusion, although there was a significant correlation between XR and US for AT thickness measurement, discordance in the diagnosis of AT thickening was observed in 17% of patients. Physicians should be aware that US assessment may result in more patients diagnosed with AT thickening than XR.
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.