Benjamin Chow

Benjamin Chow


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

30Years (1997-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 August 2011 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JMJames K. Min
James K. Min
ADAllison Dunning
Allison Dunning
FLFay Y. Lin
Fay Y. Lin
SAStephan Achenbach
Stephan Achenbach
MAMouaz H Al-Mallah
Mouaz H Al-Mallah
DBDaniel S. Berman
Daniel S. Berman

1 August 2011 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MZMaria C. Ziadi
Maria C. Ziadi
RDRobert A. Dekemp
Robert A. Dekemp
KWKathryn A. Williams
Kathryn A. Williams
AGAnn Guo
Ann Guo
BCBenjamin Chow
Benjamin Chow
RBRob S.B. Beanlands
Rob S.B. Beanlands

1 October 2013 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
KGK. Lance Gould
K. Lance Gould
NJNils P. Johnson
Nils P. Johnson
TBTimothy M. Bateman
Timothy M. Bateman
RBRob S. Beanlands
Rob S. Beanlands
FBFrank Bengel
Frank Bengel
JNJagat Narula
Jagat Narula
Angiographic severity of coronary artery stenosis has historically been the primary guide to revascularization or medical management of coronary artery disease. However, physiologic severity defined by coronary pressure and/or flow has resurged into clinical prominence as a potential, fundamental change from anatomically to physiologically guided management. This review addresses clinical coronary physiology-pressure and flow-as clinical tools for treating patients. We clarify the basic concepts that hold true for whatever technology measures coronary physiology directly and reliably, here focusing on positron emission tomography and its interplay with intracoronary measurements.

1 June 2018 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HCHyuk-Jae Chang
Hyuk-Jae Chang
FLFay Y. Lin
Fay Y. Lin
SLSang-Wook Lee
Sang-Wook Lee
DADaniele Andreini
Daniele Andreini
JBJeroen Bax
Jeroen Bax
JMJames K. Min
James K. Min

1 June 2016 in European Heart Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMManish Motwani
Manish Motwani
DDDamini Dey
Damini Dey
DBDaniel S. Berman
Daniel S. Berman
GGGuido Germano
Guido Germano
SAStephan Achenbach
Stephan Achenbach
PSPiotr J. Slomka
Piotr J. Slomka
Traditional prognostic risk assessment in patients undergoing non-invasive imaging is based upon a limited selection of clinical and imaging findings. Machine learning (ML) can consider a greater number and complexity of variables. Therefore, we investigated the feasibility and accuracy of ML to predict 5-year all-cause mortality (ACM) in patients undergoing coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA), and compared the performance to existing clinical or CCTA metrics. The analysis included 10 030 patients with suspected coronary artery disease and 5-year follow-up from the COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter registry. All patients underwent CCTA as their standard of care. Twenty-five clinical and 44 CCTA parameters were evaluated, including segment stenosis score (SSS), segment involvement score (SIS), modified Duke index (DI), number of segments with non-calcified, mixed or calcified plaques, age, sex, gender, standard cardiovascular risk factors, and Framingham risk score (FRS). Machine learning involved automated feature selection by information gain ranking, model building with a boosted ensemble algorithm, and 10-fold stratified cross-validation. Seven hundred and forty-five patients died during 5-year follow-up. Machine learning exhibited a higher area-under-curve compared with the FRS or CCTA severity scores alone (SSS, SIS, DI) for predicting all-cause mortality (ML: 0.79 vs. FRS: 0.61, SSS: 0.64, SIS: 0.64, DI: 0.62; P< 0.001). Machine learning combining clinical and CCTA data was found to predict 5-year ACM significantly better than existing clinical or CCTA metrics alone.

13 June 2017 in Circulation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
UHUdo Hoffmann
Udo Hoffmann
MFMaros Ferencik
Maros Ferencik
JUJames E. Udelson
James E. Udelson
MPMichael H. Picard
Michael H. Picard
QTQuynh A. Truong
Quynh A. Truong
PDPamela S. Douglas
Pamela S. Douglas
Background: Optimal management of patients with stable chest pain relies on the prognostic information provided by noninvasive cardiovascular testing, but there are limited data from randomized trials comparing anatomic with functional testing. Methods: In the PROMISE trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain), patients with stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) were randomly assigned to functional testing (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress, or stress echocardiography) or coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA). Site-based diagnostic test reports were classified as normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal. The primary end point was death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina hospitalizations over a median follow-up of 26.1 months. Results: Both the prevalence of normal test results and incidence rate of events in these patients were significantly lower among 4500 patients randomly assigned to CTA in comparison with 4602 patients randomly assigned to functional testing (33.4% versus 78.0%, and 0.9% versus 2.1%, respectively; both P <0.001). In CTA, 54.0% of events (n=74/137) occurred in patients with nonobstructive CAD (1%–69% stenosis). Prevalence of obstructive CAD and myocardial ischemia was low (11.9% versus 12.7%, respectively), with both findings having similar prognostic value (hazard ratio, 3.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.60–5.39; and 3.47; 95% CI, 2.42–4.99). When test findings were stratified as mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal, hazard ratios for events in comparison with normal tests increased proportionally for CTA (2.94, 7.67, 10.13; all P <0.001) but not for corresponding functional testing categories (0.94 [ P =0.87], 2.65 [ P =0.001], 3.88 [ P 10%) who had a normal functional test were reclassified as being mildly abnormal, the discriminatory capacity improved to 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64–0.74). Conclusions: Coronary CTA, by identifying patients at risk because of nonobstructive CAD, provides better prognostic information than functional testing in contemporary patients who have stable chest pain with a low burden of obstructive CAD, myocardial ischemia, and events. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01174550.