ArticleCurrent cardiovascular imaging reports2011
Radionuclide Imaging of Viable Myocardium: Is it Underutilized?
Article in Current cardiovascular imaging reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intracoronary infusion of Wharton's jelly-derived mesenchymal stem cells in acute myocardial infarction: double-blind, randomized controlled trial.BMC medicine · 2015Trial
- Taxonomy of segmental myocardial systolic dysfunction.European heart journal · 2017Review
- SPECT and PET in ischemic heart failure.Heart failure reviews · 2017Review
- In-vivo monitoring of erythropoietin treatment after myocardial infarction in mice with [⁶⁸Ga]Annexin A5 and [¹⁸F]FDG PET.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2014Article
- Value of pathologic Q wave in surface electrocardiography in the prediction of myocardial nonviability: A cardiac magnetic resonance imaging-based study.Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery disease is the major cause of heart failure in North America. Viability assessment is important as it aims to identify patients who stand to benefit from coronary revascularization. Radionuclide modalities currently used in the assessment of viability include (201)Tl SPECT, (99m)Tc-based SPECT imaging, and (18)F-fluorodexoyglucose ((18)F-FDG)-PET imaging. Different advances have been made in the last year to improve the sensitivity and specificity of these modalities. In addition, the optimum amount of viable (yet dysfunctional) myocardium is important to identify in patients, as a risk-benefit ratio must be considered. Patients with predominantly viable/hibernating myocardium can benefit from revascularization from a mortality and morbidity standpoint. However, in patients with minimal viability (predominantly scarred myocardium), revascularization risk may certainly be too high to justify revascularization without expected benefit. Understanding different radionuclide modalities and new developments in the assessment of viability in ischemic heart failure patients is the focus of this discussion.
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.