Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 831

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Plaque Characterization by Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography and the Likelihood of Acute Coronary Events in Mid-Term Follow-Up

Open access
Motoyama, Sadako, Ito, Hajime, Sarai, Masayoshi, Kondo, Takeshi, Kawai, Hideki, Nagahara, Yasuomi, Harigaya, Hiroto, Kan, Shino, Anno, Hirofumi, Takahashi, Hiroshi, Naruse, Hiroyuki, Ishii, Junichi, Hecht, Harvey, Shaw, Leslee J., Ozaki, Yukio, Narula, Jagat·2015·Journal of the American College of Cardiology
DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.069
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND Coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA)-verified positive remodeling and low attenuation plaques are considered morphological characteristics of high-risk plaque (HRP) and predict short-term risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). OBJECTIVES This study evaluated whether plaque characteristics by CTA predict mid-term likelihood of ACS. METHODS The presence of HRP and significant stenosis (SS) of ≥70% were evaluated in 3,158 patients undergoing CTA. Serial CTA was performed in 449 patients, and plaque progression (PP) was evaluated. Outcomes (fatal and nonfatal ACS) were recorded during follow-up (mean 3.9 ± 2.4 years). RESULTS ACS occurred in 88 (2.8%) patients: 48 (16.3%) of 294 HRP(+) and 40 (1.4%) of 2,864 HRP(-) patients. ACS was also significantly more frequent in SS(+) (36 of 659; 5.5%) than SS(-) patients (52 of 2,499; 2.1%). HRP(+)/SS(+) (19%) and HRP(+)/SS(-) (15%) had higher rates of ACS compared with no-plaque patients (0.6%). Although ACS incidence was relatively low in HRP(-) patients, the cumulative number of patients with ACS developing from HRP(-) lesions (n = 43) was similar to ACS patients with HRP(+) lesions (n = 45). In patients with serial CTA, PP also was an independent predictor of ACS, with HRP (27%; p < 0.0001) and without HRP (10%) compared with HRP(-)/PP(-) patients (0.3%). CONCLUSIONS CTA-verified HRP was an independent predictor of ACS. However, the cumulative number of ACS patients with HRP(-) was similar to patients with HRP(+). Additionally, plaque progression detected by serial CTA was an independent predictor of ACS.

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 · 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.069

Cites

25 of 25 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 25 references

Cited by

See all 831

Metadata

Authors
Motoyama, S., Ito, H., Sarai, M., Kondo, T., Kawai, H., Nagahara, Y., Harigaya, H., Kan, S., Anno, H., Takahashi, H., Naruse, H., Ishii, J., Hecht, H., Shaw, L. J., Ozaki, Y., & Narula, J.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-07
Volume
66
Issue
4
Pages
337-346
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.069
OpenAlex
W988932408
Cited by
831
References
25
FWCI
56.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Plaque Characterization by Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography and the Likelihood of Acute Coronary Events in Mid-Term Follow-Up. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.069
The paper
Motoyama, S., Ito, H., Sarai, M., Kondo, T., Kawai, H., Nagahara, Y., Harigaya, H., Kan, S., Anno, H., Takahashi, H., Naruse, H., Ishii, J., Hecht, H., Shaw, L. J., Ozaki, Y., & Narula, J. (2015). Plaque Characterization by Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography and the Likelihood of Acute Coronary Events in Mid-Term Follow-Up. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.069

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.