ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2007
Assessment of coronary flow reserve by sestamibi imaging in patients with typical chest pain and normal coronary arteries.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of global and regional myocardial blood flow quantification using dynamic solid-state detector SPECT and Tc-99 m-sestamibi or Tc-99 m-tetrofosmin in a routine clinical setting.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- 1,25-Dihydroxy vitamin D and coronary microvascular function.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2013Article
- Reduced coronary flow reserve in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism: a study by G-SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2010Article
- Assessment of the arterial input function for estimation of coronary flow reserve by single photon emission computed tomography: comparison of two different approaches.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2009Article
- Estimation of coronary flow reserve by SPECT: myth or reality?European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2007Article
- Highlights of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine Congress, Athens, Greece, 30 September to 4 October 2006.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2007Article
- Abnormal myocardial perfusion in the absence of anatomically significant coronary artery disease: implications and clinical significance.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear CardiologyArticle
- Assessment of coronary flow reserve using single photon emission computed tomography with technetium 99m-labeled tracers.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear CardiologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe assessed coronary flow reserve (CFR) by sestamibi imaging in patients with typical chest pain, positive exercise stress test and normal coronary vessels.
methodsThirty-five patients with typical chest pain and normal angiogram and 12 control subjects with atypical chest pain underwent dipyridamole/rest (99m)Tc-sestamibi imaging. Myocardial blood flow (MBF) was estimated by measuring first transit counts in the pulmonary artery and myocardial counts from SPECT images. Estimated CFR was expressed as the ratio of stress to rest MBF. Rest MBF and CFR were corrected for rate-pressure product (RPP) and expressed as normalised MBF (MBF(n)) and normalised CFR (CFR(n)). Coronary vascular resistances (CVR) were calculated as the ratio between mean arterial pressure and estimated MBF.
resultsAt rest, estimated MBF and MBF(n) were lower in controls than in patients (0.98 +/- 0.4 vs 1.30 +/- 0.3 counts/pixel/s and 1.14 +/- 0.5 vs 1.64 +/- 0.6 counts/pixel/s, respectively, both p < 0.02). Stress MBF was not different between controls and patients (2.34 +/- 0.8 vs 2.01 +/- 0.7 counts/pixel/s, p=NS). Estimated CFR was 2.40 +/- 0.3 in controls and 1.54 +/- 0.3 in patients (p < 0.0001). After correction for the RPP, CFR(n) was still higher in controls than in patients (2.1 +/- 0.5 vs 1.29 +/- 0.5, p < 0.0001). At baseline, CVR values were lower (p < 0.01) in patients than in controls. Dipyridamole-induced changes in CVR were greater (p < 0.0001) in controls (-63%) than in patients (-35%). In the overall study population, a significant correlation between dipyridamole-induced changes in CVR and CFR was observed (r = -0.88, p < 0.0001).
conclusionSPECT might represent a useful non-invasive method for assessing coronary vascular function in patients with angina and a normal coronary angiogram.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.