Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22218877›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2012

Effect of stress testing on left ventricular mechanical synchrony by phase analysis of gated positron emission tomography in patients with normal myocardial perfusion.

Wael AlJaroudi, M Chadi Alraies, Frank DiFilippo, Richard C Brunken, Manuel D Cerqueira, Wael A Jaber

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony in patient with CAD: The Saga continues.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Article
  2. Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2020: positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Review
  3. Phase analysis of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT and cardiac resynchronization therapy: The good, the bad, and the ugly.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Article
  4. Early onset of left ventricular regional asynchrony in arteries with sub-clinical stenosis.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Auxiliary ischemic markers, the role of left ventricular dyssynchrony.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
    Article
  7. A perfect tool for comprehensive evaluation of myocardial perfusion and function: Stress PET imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
    Article
  8. Phase analysis of gated PET in the evaluation of mechanical ventricular synchrony: A narrative overview.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
    Review
  9. Myocardial stunning by gated SPECT: An old tool reinvented in a stunning turn.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
    Article
  10. Mechanical dyssynchrony with phase analysis of gated SPECT: Nap time is over.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Vasodilator stress and left ventricular asynchrony.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017
    Article
  14. Observational
  15. Early post-stress LV dyssynchrony: a new marker for significant CAD.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2014
    Article
  16. Association between left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony with myocardial perfusion and functional parameters in patients with left bundle branch block.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2013
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wael AlJaroudiDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Imaging Institutes, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA. aljarow@ccf.org
M Chadi Alraies
Frank DiFilippo
Richard C Brunken
Manuel D Cerqueira
Wael A Jaber
Cleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere are limited data on whether differences exist in left ventricular (LV) mechanical dyssynchrony indices derived from stress versus rest gated positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with normal myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI).

methodsStress/rest (82)Rb gated PET was performed in consecutive patients with normal MPI between 2006 and 2010. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 [LV ejection fraction (EF) ≥ 55% and QRS < 120 ms] and group 2 (LVEF ≤35%). Images were acquired on a dedicated PET scanner prior to and on a hybrid PET/CT system after November 2008. LV dyssynchrony indices [phase standard deviation (SD)° and SD (ms)] were derived from stress and rest gated images.

resultsThere were 91 patients in group 1 (age 61 ± 13, LVEF 66 ± 8%, normal QRS) and 126 in group 2 (age 66 ± 12, LVEF 25 ± 7%). The stress derived LVEF were significantly higher than rest for either group (p < 0.0001). Patients with cardiomyopathy had significantly higher dyssynchrony indices compared to those with normal LVEF (rest SD° 49.2 ± 21.5° vs 16.8 ± 7.8° and stress SD° 42.5 ± 19.4° vs 12.4 ± 3.7°, respectively, p < 0.0001 for both). The dyssynchrony indices derived from rest gated images were significantly higher than those derived from stress in both groups (p < 0.001 by unpaired and paired t test) and irrespective of the type of PET scanner utilized. Finally, 20/87 (23%) patients with normal LVEF and 27/66 (41%) of those with cardiomyopathy but without dyssynchrony based on stress indices were recategorized as having significant dyssynchrony given their resting indices.

conclusionLV mechanical dyssynchrony indices by phase analysis are smaller when derived from peak stress versus rest gated PET imaging in patients with normal MPI, irrespective of the resting LVEF.

Indexed as

Mechanical PhenomenaMyocardial Perfusion ImagingStress, PhysiologicalBiomechanical PhenomenaCardiac-Gated Single-Photon Emission Computer-Assisted TomographyFemaleHemodynamicsHumansMaleMiddle AgedVentricular Dysfunction, Left

Identifiers

PMID22218877
OpenAlexW2019245916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.