Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42009867›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2026

Detection of calcified plaques: comparison between coronary CT angiography and thin-slice non-contrast CT with deep learning-aided image registration.

Kenrick Schulze, Federico Biavati, Bernhard Föllmer, Sotirios Tsogias, Surenjav Chimed, Hanna Balogh, Norbert Nagy, Ferhat Yavuz, Anne-Marieke Stantien, Renad-Heyam Abdelrahman and 5 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

15 authors.

Kenrick SchulzeDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. kenrick.schulze@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-7104-9049
Federico BiavatiDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Bernhard FöllmerDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sotirios TsogiasDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Surenjav ChimedInstitute of Medical Sciences, National University of Medical Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Hanna BaloghDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Norbert NagyDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Ferhat YavuzDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Anne-Marieke StantienDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Renad-Heyam AbdelrahmanDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Steffen LukasDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Maria BosserdtDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Marc KachelrießGerman Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Wojciech SamekDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, Fraunhofer Heinrich Hertz Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Marc DeweyDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft BIOQIC GRK2260, project-ID: 289347353FP7 Health 603266-2, HEALTH-2012.2.4.-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate whether coronary CT angiography (CCTA) misses calcified plaques detected by thin-slice non-contrast CT (NCCT). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study included patients from two sites in the DISCHARGE trial for whom both 0.5 mm thin-slice NCCT and CCTA were available. Plaques on CCTA were defined as missed if they showed no spatial overlap with NCCT-detected plaques after deep learning-aided co-registration. Comparisons of plaque volume, density, and local coronary luminal attenuation between plaques missed and those detected by CCTA were performed using the Mann-Whitney U-test. In addition, the presence of these plaques on standard calcium scoring CT was assessed. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland‒Altman analysis.

resultsThis study included 45 patients (40% female, mean age 62 ± 11 years), in whom CCTA missed 37.6% of calcified plaques detected by NCCT (121/322). Missing calcified plaques on CCTA misclassified 8.9% of patients (4/45) as having no plaques. Compared with detected plaques, plaques missed by CCTA were both significantly smaller in volume (3.0 mm³ [IQR, 1.5-4.9] vs. 9.2 mm³ [IQR, 4.3-21.9], p < 0.001) and had lower density (212.7 HU [IQR, 174.5-242.4] vs. 292.7 HU [IQR, 243.2-361.3], p < 0.001). Only 44.0% of plaques (53/121) missed by CCTA were detected by standard calcium scoring CT. Interobserver analysis demonstrated excellent agreement for calcified plaque volume on CCTA (ICC = 0.91) and NCCT (ICC = 0.98).

conclusionCCTA missed more than one-third of coronary calcified plaques that are identifiable on co-registered thin-slice NCCT, which suggests an underutilized role of thin-slice NCCT in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: Question Accurate detection of all coronary plaques is crucial for risk stratification. CCTA misses calcified plaques, which are detectable by thin-slice non-contrast CT (NCCT). Findings CCTA misses over one-third of calcified plaques, nearly half of which are also missed by calcium scoring CT. NCCT detected these calcified plaques. Clinical relevance Deep learning-aided registration enables multimodal CCTA-NCCT assessment, improving detection of calcified plaques overlooked by CCTA alone and providing more accurate plaque burden quantification that may support better clinical decision-making, which should be investigated in future studies.

Indexed as

CalcinosisComputed Tomography AngiographyCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseDeep LearningPlaque, AtheroscleroticRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsArtificial intelligenceCoronary artery calcificationCoronary computed tomography angiographyImage registration

Identifiers

PMID42009867
PMCPMC13342326

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.