Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 420

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control

Open access
Scheffel, Hans, Alkadhi, Hatem, Plass, André, Vachenauer, Robert, Desbiolles, Lotus, Gaemperli, Oliver, Schepis, Tiziano, Frauenfelder, Thomas, Schertler, Thomas, Husmann, Lars, Grunenfelder, Jürg, Genoni, Michele, Kaufmann, Philipp A., Marincek, Borut, Leschka, Sebastian·2006·European Radiology

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) for evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD) in a population with extensive coronary calcifications without heart rate control. Thirty patients (24 male, 6 female, mean age 63.1+/-11.3 years) with a high pre-test probability of CAD underwent DSCT coronary angiography and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) within 14+/-9 days. No beta-blockers were administered prior to the scan. Two readers independently assessed image quality of all coronary segments with a diameter > or =1.5 mm using a four-point score (1: excellent to 4: not assessable) and qualitatively assessed significant stenoses as narrowing of the luminal diameter >50%. Causes of false-positive (FP) and false-negative (FN) ratings were assigned to calcifications or motion artifacts. ICA was considered the standard of reference. Mean body mass index was 28.3+/-3.9 kg/m2 (range 22.4-36.3 kg/m2), mean heart rate during CT was 70.3+/-14.2 bpm (range 47-102 bpm), and mean Agatston score was 821+/-904 (range 0-3,110). Image quality was diagnostic (scores 1-3) in 98.6% (414/420) of segments (mean image quality score 1.68+/-0.75); six segments in three patients were considered not assessable (1.4%). DSCT correctly identified 54 of 56 significant coronary stenoses. Severe calcifications accounted for false ratings in nine segments (eight FP/one FN) and motion artifacts in two segments (one FP/one FN). Overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value for evaluating CAD were 96.4, 97.5, 85.7, and 99.4%, respectively. First experience indicates that DSCT coronary angiography provides high diagnostic accuracy for assessment of CAD in a high pre-test probability population with extensive coronary calcifications and without heart rate control.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00330-006-0474-0

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 420

Metadata

Authors
Scheffel, H., Alkadhi, H., Plass, A., Vachenauer, R., Desbiolles, L., Gaemperli, O., Schepis, T., Frauenfelder, T., Schertler, T., Husmann, L., Grunenfelder, J., Genoni, M., Kaufmann, P. A., Marincek, B., & Leschka, S.
Venue
European Radiology
Published
2006-09-19
Volume
16
Issue
12
Pages
2739-2747
ISSN
  • 0938-7994 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1084
OpenAlex
W2032610614
Cited by
420
References
1
FWCI
55.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00330-006-0474-0
The paper
Scheffel, H., Alkadhi, H., Plass, A., Vachenauer, R., Desbiolles, L., Gaemperli, O., Schepis, T., Frauenfelder, T., Schertler, T., Husmann, L., Grunenfelder, J., Genoni, M., Kaufmann, P. A., Marincek, B., & Leschka, S. (2006). Accuracy of dual-source CT coronary angiography: first experience in a high pre-test probability population without heart rate control. European Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0474-0

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.