Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19787721›Full record

ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2009

Comprehensive adenosine stress perfusion MRI defines the etiology of chest pain in the emergency room: Comparison with nuclear stress test.

Jens Vogel-Claussen, Jan Skrok, David Dombroski, Steven M Shea, Edward P Shapiro, Mark Bohlman, Christine H Lorenz, Joao A C Lima, David A Bluemke

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Multimodality Imaging in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.Current cardiovascular imaging reports · 2014
    Review
  7. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in systemic hypertension.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2012
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jens Vogel-ClaussenJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology, Baltimore, Maryland 21287, USA. jclauss1@jhmi.edu
Jan Skrok
David Dombroski
Steven M Shea
Edward P Shapiro
Mark Bohlman
Christine H Lorenz
Joao A C Lima
David A Bluemke
Johns Hopkins University · USSiemens (United States) · USNational Institutes of Health · US

Funding

Molecular Biomedical Imaging Laboratory (NIBIB)ZIAEB000072 · NIBIB · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING · PI BLUEMKE, DAVID · 2010 to 2017
$5.0M
Molecular Biomedical Imaging Laboratory (CC)ZIACL090019 · CLC · CLINICAL CENTER · PI JONES, ELIZABETH C. · 2010 to 2017
$0k
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA CL090019Intramural NIH HHS ZIA EB000072
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare standard of care nuclear SPECT imaging with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for emergency room (ER) patients with chest pain and intermediate probability for coronary artery disease. MATERIALS AND

methodsThirty-one patients with chest pain, negative electrocardiogram (ECG), and negative cardiac enzymes who underwent cardiac single photon emission tomography (SPECT) within 24 h of ER admission were enrolled. Patients underwent a comprehensive cardiac MRI exam including gated cine imaging, adenosine stress and rest perfusion imaging and delayed enhancement imaging. Patients were followed for 14 +/- 4.7 months.

resultsOf 27 patients, 8 (30%) showed subendocardial hypoperfusion on MRI that was not detected on SPECT. These patients had a higher rate of diabetes (P = 0.01) and hypertension (P = 0.01) and a lower global myocardial perfusion reserve (P = 0.01) compared with patients with a normal cardiac MRI (n = 10). Patients with subendocardial hypoperfusion had more risk factors for cardiovascular disease (mean 4.4) compared with patients with a normal MRI (mean 2.5; P = 0.005). During the follow-up period, patients with subendocardial hypoperfusion on stress MRI were more likely to return to the ER with chest pain compared with patients who had a normal cardiac MRI (P = 0.02). Four patients did not finish the MR exam due to claustrophobia.

conclusionIn patients with chest pain, diabetes and hypertension, cardiac stress perfusion MRI identified diffuse subendocardial hypoperfusion defects in the ER setting not seen on cardiac SPECT, which is suspected to reflect microvascular disease.

Indexed as

AdenosineTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonVasodilator AgentsChest PainCoronary AngiographyCoronary CirculationElectrocardiographyEmergency Service, HospitalExercise TestFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance Imaging, CineMaleMicrocirculationMiddle AgedProspective StudiesAdenosineVasodilator Agents

Identifiers

PMID19787721
PMCPMC3037112
OpenAlexW2136120337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.