AzTrials
AzTrials

Chest PainNCT07235657

AI-Assisted Interpretation of Cardiac CT in the Emergency Department

A study testing Angiomics AI-based Coronary CT Interpretation Tool and Standard CCTA Interpretation without AI in people with Chest Pain and Acute Coronary Syndrome, run by Yonsei University at 1 site in South Korea.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This prospective, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial is designed to evaluate the impact of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) interpretation tool (Angiomics) on emergency physicians' diagnostic performance and clinical decision-making in patients presenting with… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
What is being tested?
Angiomics AI-based Coronary CT Interpretation Tool and Standard CCTA Interpretation without AI
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
620 participants
Where
1 siteSouth Korea
Study dates
29 Dec 2025to Aug 2027
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Adults aged 18 years or older Patients presenting to the emergency department with acute chest pain or chest discomfort Patients assessed as intermediate risk (Heart Score 4-6) Patients for whom CCTA was ordered by the treating physician as part of routine clinical care

Who cannot join

  • Prior history of coronary revascularization (coronary artery bypass graft surgery or stent placement) Presence of intracardiac metallic devices such as pacemaker or prosthetic heart valves Contraindications to contrast media (e.g., contrast allergy, severe renal impairment with eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m²) Patients unable to cooperate (e.g., severe anxiety, non-cooperation) Non-diagnostic CCTA images are identified after image acquisition and handled according to the protocol-defined analysis exclusions.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

arom choi, MD contact

+82-2-2228-2465

aromchoi@yuhs.ac

South Korea1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yonsei University Severance Hospital

    Seoul

    arom choi, MD, +82-2-2228-2465, aromchoi@yuhs.ac

    Recruiting

Other trials in South Korea

About this study

Official title: Evaluation of the Impact of AI-Based Cardiac CT Interpretation Tool on Emergency Physicians' Decision-Making

This prospective, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial is designed to evaluate the impact of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) interpretation tool (Angiomics) on emergency physicians' diagnostic performance and clinical decision-making in patients presenting with acute chest pain.

CCTA is a critical diagnostic modality for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the emergency department (ED). Accurate interpretation often requires experienced radiologists, who may not always be available, particularly during off-hours. The introduction of AI-based interpretation tools into clinical workflow has the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy, increase physician confidence, reduce delays in decision-making, and improve efficiency of resource utilization. However, evidence regarding the real-world effectiveness of such AI tools in the ED setting remains limited.

Read more

Eligible participants will include adults aged 18 years or older presenting to the ED with chest pain and classified as intermediate risk (HEART score 4-6). Participants will be randomized into two groups: (1) AI-assisted CCTA interpretation, in which emergency physicians interpret scans with access to AI results; and (2) standard interpretation, in which emergency physicians interpret CCTA without AI support. In both groups, physicians will document the presence of stenosis in the four major coronary arteries (LM, LAD, LCX, RCA).

After informed consent, participants are randomised in a 1:1 ratio before CCTA acquisition to AI-assisted or standard CCTA interpretation. Diagnostic confidence is recorded using four categories: very high, high, moderate and low. The enrolment target is 620 participants, with 310 participants per group. This is a single-centre trial conducted at Severance Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

The primary outcome is the negative predictive value (NPV) of CCTA interpretation at the patient level, comparing AI-assisted versus standard interpretations against the reference standard of blinded consensus readings by board-certified radiologists. Secondary outcomes include per-patient diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, PPV and AUROC), per-vessel diagnostic performance, emergency physician diagnostic confidence and protocol deviation rate. Other outcomes include cardiology consultation rate and time to disposition decision.

Enrollment and follow-up will be conducted at Severance Hospital over a 24-month period following IRB approval. The results are expected to provide evidence for the clinical utility and effectiveness of AI-based CCTA interpretation in the ED and to guide integration of AI into emergency care in order to optimize patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Read the detailed description

This study is a prospective, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the impact of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) interpretation tool (Angiomics) on the diagnostic accuracy, confidence, and decision-making of emergency physicians in patients presenting with acute chest pain.

Background and Rationale CCTA is widely used in the emergency department (ED) for patients presenting with acute chest pain or suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). It provides rapid and precise visualization of the coronary arteries and assists emergency physicians in making time-sensitive clinical decisions. However, interpretation of CCTA requires specialized training and experience, which may not always be available, particularly during nights or in resource-limited settings. This limitation can delay diagnosis and treatment, potentially leading to adverse patient outcomes.

Recent advances in AI technology have enabled the development of automated tools capable of analyzing CCTA images and identifying clinically significant findings such as coronary artery stenosis and myocardial ischemia. These tools have the potential to support emergency physicians by improving diagnostic accuracy, reducing interpretation time, enhancing physician confidence, and optimizing the use of healthcare resources. Despite these advantages, the influence of AI-based interpretation on real-world ED clinical workflows and physician decision-making remains insufficiently studied.

The present trial is designed to address this knowledge gap by evaluating whether the integration of an AI-based CCTA interpretation tool improves emergency physician diagnostic performance and clinical confidence, and whether such improvements translate into more reliable decision-making in the ED.

Study Design This study will employ a prospective, pragmatic, randomized controlled design. Eligible participants will be adults aged 18 years or older presenting to the ED with chest pain and classified as intermediate risk according to the HEART score (4-6 points). Participants are randomised after informed consent and before CCTA acquisition. Allocation is 1:1 between the AI-assisted interpretation group and the standard interpretation group.

  1. AI-assisted group (Experimental Arm): Emergency physicians interpret CCTA scans with access to AI results provided by the Angiomics software.
  2. Standard interpretation group (Active Comparator Arm): Emergency physicians interpret CCTA scans without access to AI results.

All physicians will evaluate stenosis in the four major coronary arteries (left main, left anterior descending [LAD], left circumflex [LCX], and right coronary artery [RCA]) and record their findings using a standardized format (Yes/No/Non-diagnostic/Other findings). Emergency physicians record diagnostic confidence using four categories: very high, high, moderate and low.

Reference Standard The reference standard for diagnostic performance will be the blinded consensus interpretation of board-certified radiologists specialized in thoracic imaging. Previous studies have demonstrated concordance of 98-99% between expert radiologist consensus and invasive coronary angiography, supporting the validity of this approach.

Outcomes The primary outcome is the negative predictive value (NPV) of CCTA interpretation at the patient level, comparing AI-assisted versus standard interpretations. Patient-level outcomes will be derived by aggregating findings across the four major coronary arteries.

Secondary outcomes include:

  • Per-patient diagnostic performance: sensitivity, specificity, PPV and AUROC
  • Per-vessel diagnostic performance for LM, LAD, LCx and RCA: sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and AUROC
  • Emergency physician diagnostic confidence (four categories)
  • Protocol deviation rate Other outcomes include cardiology consultation rate and time to disposition decision.

Reader Experience and Image Quality Emergency physician imaging training, prior CCTA interpretation experience and years of clinical experience are collected. Image quality is assessed by a radiologist blinded to AI outputs, emergency physician interpretations and allocation, and classified as Poor/Fair or Good/Excellent. These variables are considered in exploratory adjusted analyses.

Analysis Population and Preliminary Interpretation Exposure The primary analysis uses a modified intention-to-treat population, excluding participants whose emergency physician was exposed to a preliminary radiology interpretation before completing the study interpretation. AI processing failures remain in the assigned group. A sensitivity analysis includes participants with prior preliminary radiology exposure when both index and reference interpretations are available.

Sample Size and Statistical Analysis The original enrolment target was 552 participants, with 276 participants per group, allowing for 10% dropout. Following consultation with a statistician, the target was revised using a pooled negative diagnosis rate of 64.9% to obtain 181 negative interpretations per group. Allowing for 10% dropout, the required sample size was 181/(0.649 × 0.90), rounded up to 310 participants per group, for a total of 620 participants. The IRB approved the sample-size amendment on 20 July 2026. The persons responsible for the sample-size decision did not have access to group-specific interim results.

An interim analysis was conducted on 8 September 2026. Type I error is controlled using the prespecified O'Brien-Fleming alpha-spending approach, accounting for the actual information fraction.

Diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, accuracy) will be compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate. Agreement between physician and radiologist consensus readings will be assessed using Cohen's Kappa. All statistical tests will be two-sided.

Data Collection and Confidentiality Data will be collected within the routine clinical workflow and stored in a secure, de-identified format according to institutional policies and national privacy regulations. Only authorized investigators will have access to the data. Data will be stored for three years after study completion before secure disposal.

Safety and Monitoring This trial poses minimal risk to participants, as it involves no procedures outside of routine clinical care. No additional radiation, medications, or invasive interventions are introduced by study participation. The study principal investigator will monitor protocol adherence and data quality on an annual basis. The study is subject to continuing IRB review and institutional monitoring or audit in accordance with institutional procedures. The principal investigator is responsible for protocol adherence, data integrity and safety reporting.

Significance This study will provide evidence regarding the clinical utility of an AI-based CCTA interpretation tool in the ED. Findings are expected to clarify whether AI support improves diagnostic accuracy and physician confidence, and whether it can be effectively integrated into real-world emergency care. The results may inform best practices for the implementation of AI tools to optimize patient outcomes and resource utilization in acute care settings.

Being tested
Angiomics AI-based Coronary CT Interpretation Tool, Standard CCTA Interpretation without AI
Keywords
Artificial Intelligence, Emergency Service, Hospital, Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography
Medical subject headings
Chest Pain, Acute Coronary Syndrome, Coronary Artery Disease, Emergencies

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Angiomics AI-based Coronary CT Interpretation ToolDevice

    AI software integrated with the hospital PACS system to assist emergency physicians in interpreting coronary CT angiography (CCTA). The tool automatically analyzes stenosis in the left main, LAD, LCX, and RCA, and physicians use the results to guide their interpretation.

  • Standard CCTA Interpretation without AIOther

    Emergency physicians independently interpret coronary CT angiography (CCTA) without access to the AI tool. Physicians evaluate stenosis in the left main, LAD, LCX, and RCA, and report diagnostic confidence using a four-category confidence rating: very high, high, moderate and low.

Study groups in NCT07235657
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
AI-assisted CCTA interpretationExperimentalEmergency physicians interpret coronary CT angiography (CCTA) with the assistance of an AI-based interpretation tool (Angiomics). Physicians record stenosis presence in four major coronary vessels and rate diagnostic confidence using a four-category confidence rating: very high, high, moderate and low.
Receives: Device: Angiomics AI-based Coronary CT Interpretation Tool
Standard CCTA interpretation (without AI)Active comparatorEmergency physicians independently interpret coronary CT angiography (CCTA) without access to the AI-based interpretation tool. Physicians record stenosis presence in four major coronary vessels and rate diagnostic confidence using a four-category confidence rating: very high, high, moderate and low.
Receives: Other: Standard CCTA Interpretation without AI

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Per-patient negative predictive value of emergency physician CCTA interpretation

    Negative predictive value is the number of true-negative patients divided by all patients classified as negative by the emergency physician, using blinded expert radiologist consensus as the reference standard. Significant coronary stenosis is defined as ≥50% luminal narrowing. A patient is classified as positive if at least one of the four major coronary vessels (LM, LAD, LCx or RCA) is positive, and as negative if all four vessels are negative. Negative predictive value is compared between the AI-assisted and standard interpretation groups.

    Measured: During the initial emergency department visit, at the time of index CCTA interpretation.

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Per-patient diagnostic performance

    Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of emergency physician interpretation, using blinded expert radiologist consensus as the reference standard. AUROC is calculated from binary stenosis classifications.

    Measured: During the initial emergency department visit, at the time of index CCTA interpretation.

  2. Per-vessel diagnostic performance

    Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and AUROC for the LM, LAD, LCx and RCA, using blinded expert radiologist consensus as the reference standard.

    Measured: During the initial emergency department visit, at the time of index CCTA interpretation.

  3. Emergency physician diagnostic confidence

    Distribution of four-category confidence ratings (very high, high, moderate and low), compared between randomised groups.

    Measured: At completion of the emergency physician's index CCTA interpretation during the initial emergency department visit.

  4. Protocol deviation rate

    Proportion of randomised participants with a documented protocol deviation.

    Measured: During the initial emergency department episode.

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted19 Nov 2025
  2. Study start29 Dec 2025
  3. Primary completionJun 2027 (estimated)
  4. Study completionAug 2027 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Diagnosis
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
620 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07235657
Sponsor's protocol ID
4-2025-1002
Status last verified
Nov 2026
First submitted
14 Nov 2025
Last updated
5 Nov 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided: Requests for de-identified individual participant data, a data dictionary and analysis code will be considered after publication of the primary results. Access is subject to IRB approval and applicable confidentiality requirements.

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Angiomics AI-based Coronary CT Interpretation Tool and Standard CCTA Interpretation without AI in people with Chest Pain and Acute Coronary Syndrome, run by Yonsei University at 1 site in South Korea.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Nov 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in South Korea. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact arom choi, MD (+82-2-2228-2465, aromchoi@yuhs.ac), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Per-patient negative predictive value of emergency physician CCTA interpretation (time frame: During the initial emergency department visit, at the time of index CCTA interpretation.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in