Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,018

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

High-Resolution Spiral Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in Patients Referred for Diagnostic Conventional Coronary Angiography

Mollet, Nico R., Cademartiri, Filippo, van Mieghem, Carlos A.G., Runza, Giuseppe, McFadden, Eugène P., Baks, Timo, Serruys, Patrick W., Krestin, Gabriel P., de Feyter, Pim J.·2005·Circulation

Abstract

Background— The diagnostic performance of the latest 64-slice CT scanner, with increased temporal (165 ms) and spatial (0.4 mm 3 ) resolution, to detect significant stenoses in the clinically relevant coronary tree is unknown. Methods and Results— We studied 52 patients (34 men; mean age, 59.6±12.1 years) with atypical chest pain, stable or unstable angina pectoris, or non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction scheduled for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. All patients had stable sinus rhythm. Patients with initial heart rates ≥70 bpm received β-blockers. Mean scan time was 13.3±0.9 seconds. The CT scans were analyzed by 2 observers unaware of the results of invasive coronary angiography, which was used as the standard of reference. All available coronary segments, regardless of size, were included in the evaluation. Lesions with ≥50 luminal narrowing were considered significant stenoses. Invasive coronary angiography demonstrated the absence of significant disease in 25% (13 of 52), single-vessel disease in 31% (16 of 52), and multivessel disease in 45% (23 of 52) of patients. One unsuccessful CT scan was classified as inconclusive. Ninety-four significant stenoses were present in the remaining 51 patients. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of CT for detecting significant stenoses on a segment-by-segment analysis were 99% (93 of 94; 95% CI, 94 to 99), 95% (601 of 631; 95% CI, 93 to 96), 76% (93 of 123; 95% CI, 67 to 89), and 99% (601 of 602; 95% CI, 99 to 100), respectively. Conclusions— Noninvasive 64-slice CT coronary angiography accurately detects coronary stenoses in patients in sinus rhythm and presenting with atypical chest pain, stable or unstable angina, or non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.105.533471

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 1,018

Metadata

Authors
Mollet, N. R., Cademartiri, F., van Mieghem, C. A. G., Runza, G., McFadden, E. P., Baks, T., Serruys, P. W., Krestin, G. P., & de Feyter, P. J.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2005-10-11
Volume
112
Issue
15
Pages
2318-2323
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2164987356
Cited by
1,018
References
1
FWCI
104.51
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: High-Resolution Spiral Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in Patients Referred for Diagnostic Conventional Coronary Angiography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.105.533471
The paper
Mollet, N. R., Cademartiri, F., van Mieghem, C. A. G., Runza, G., McFadden, E. P., Baks, T., Serruys, P. W., Krestin, G. P., & de Feyter, P. J. (2005). High-Resolution Spiral Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in Patients Referred for Diagnostic Conventional Coronary Angiography. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.533471

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.