Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 203

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Techniques for the Detection of Coronary Atherosclerosis: Multi–detector Row CT Coronary Angiography

Vogl, Thomas J., Abolmaali, Nasreddin D., Diebold, Thomas, Engelmann, Kerstin, Ay, Mehtap, Dogan, Selami, Wimmer-Greinecker, Gerhardt, Moritz, Anton, Herzog, Christopher·2002·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the accuracy of different computed tomographic (CT) reformation techniques in assessing the coronary arteries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four patients undergoing both multi-detector row CT and invasive coronary angiography were consecutively included in a retrospective study. CT scans were obtained with collimation of 4 x 1 mm, pitch of 1.5, and rotation time of 500 msec. Retrospective electrocardiographic gating was used for image reconstruction, with 1.25-mm section thickness and 0.5-mm increment. The CT data set of each patient was evaluated by independent observers using transverse scanning, virtual endoscopic, and three-dimensional reformation and multiplanar reformation. RESULTS: Hemodynamically relevant stenoses (>50%) were detected with highest sensitivity at transverse scanning (58 of 79 [73.4%] stenoses), followed by virtual endoscopic (38 of 79 [48.1%] stenoses) and three-dimensional reformation (34 of 79 [43.0%] stenoses), and multiplanar reformation (37 of 79 [46.8%] stenoses). Atherosclerotic plaques were identified with comparable sensitivities at transverse scanning (143 of 218 plaques [65.6%]) and at three-dimensional (139 of 218 [63.8%] plaques) and virtual endoscopic reformation (136 of 218 [62.4%] plaques). Multiplanar reformation had distinctly poorer results (217 of 218 [58.3%] plaques). Combined interpretation with all four techniques increased sensitivity to 74.7% (59 of 79) for stenosis and 71.6% (156 of 218) for atherosclerosis. Calculated overall specificity was 91.4% or greater. Sufficient vascular evaluation was possible only in vessels larger than 1.6 mm in diameter. Thus, even in patients with heart rates below 60 bpm, only 80.0% of all coronary segments could be visualized, while at higher frequencies, visibility decreased to 66.2%. CONCLUSION: Although multi-detector row CT is a favorable alternative procedure in evaluating coronary arteries, its clinical value still is restricted to low heart rates and proximal coronary arterial segments.

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 · 10.1148/radiol.2231010515

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

See all 203

Metadata

Authors
Vogl, T. J., Abolmaali, N. D., Diebold, T., Engelmann, K., Ay, M., Dogan, S., Wimmer-Greinecker, G., Moritz, A., & Herzog, C.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2002-04
Volume
223
Issue
1
Pages
212-220
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2100075919
Cited by
203
References
2
FWCI
26.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Techniques for the Detection of Coronary Atherosclerosis: Multi–detector Row CT Coronary Angiography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2231010515
The paper
Vogl, T. J., Abolmaali, N. D., Diebold, T., Engelmann, K., Ay, M., Dogan, S., Wimmer-Greinecker, G., Moritz, A., & Herzog, C. (2002). Techniques for the Detection of Coronary Atherosclerosis: Multi–detector Row CT Coronary Angiography. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2231010515

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.