CT Angiography after 20 Years: A Transformation in Cardiovascular Disease Characterization Continues to Advance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through a marriage of spiral computed tomography (CT) and graphical volumetric image processing, CT angiography was born 20 years ago. Fueled by a series of technical innovations in CT and image processing, over the next 5-15 years, CT angiography toppled conventional angiography, the undisputed diagnostic reference standard for vascular disease for the prior 70 years, as the preferred modality for the diagnosis and characterization of most cardiovascular abnormalities. This review recounts the evolution of CT angiography from its development and early challenges to a maturing modality that has provided unique insights into cardiovascular disease characterization and management. Selected clinical challenges, which include acute aortic syndromes, peripheral vascular disease, aortic stent-graft and transcatheter aortic valve assessment, and coronary artery disease, are presented as contrasting examples of how CT angiography is changing our approach to cardiovascular disease diagnosis and management. Finally, the recently introduced capabilities for multispectral imaging, tissue perfusion imaging, and radiation dose reduction through iterative reconstruction are explored with consideration toward the continued refinement and advancement of CT angiography.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".