Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22527794›Full record

Trial reportJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2012

Impact of left ventricular function and the extent of ischemia and scar by stress myocardial perfusion imaging on prognosis and therapeutic risk reduction in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease: results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial.

Leslee J Shaw, Manuel D Cerqueira, Maria M Brooks, Andrew D Althouse, Veronica V Sansing, George A Beller, Rodica Pop-Busui, Raymond Taillefer, Bernard R Chaitman, Raymond J Gibbons and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Myocardial scar reduction after cardiac resynchronization therapy assessed by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022
    Article
  9. Gender differences in outcome in patients with diabetes mellitus.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022
    Article
  10. SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging-based ischemia-guided early coronary revascularization improves survival: More fuel to the fire.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Early nuclear stress testing after CABG: The new standard or too soon to tell?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Refining risk in diabetes and CAD with SPECT MPI: New insights and future challenges.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Comparison between the summed difference score and myocardial blood flow measured byJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018
    Article
  20. Deciding wisely: A case for an effective use of myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018
    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

12 authors.

Leslee J ShawEmory Clinical Cardiovascular Research Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, 1462 Clifton Rd NE, Room 529, Atlanta, GA 30306, USA. lshaw3@emory.edu
Manuel D Cerqueira
Maria M Brooks
Andrew D Althouse
Veronica V Sansing
George A Beller
Rodica Pop-Busui
Raymond Taillefer
Bernard R Chaitman
Raymond J Gibbons
Jaekyeong Heo
Ami E Iskandrian

Funding

BARI II:Foreign RecruitmentU01HL061744 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI KELSEY, SHERYL F · 2000 to 2009
$55.4M
BARI II - FIBRINOLYSIS AND COAGULATION COREU01HL063804 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT &ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI SOBEL, BURTON E · 2000 to 2006
$3.8M
ECONOMIC OUTCOMES OF TREATMENT STRATEGIES IN BAR1-2U01HL061748 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI HLATKY, MARK A. · 2000 to 2006
$2.6M
Cardiac Autonomic Neuropathy and Myocardial Dysfunction in Type 1 DiabetesR01HL102334 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BUSUI (POP-BUSUI), RODICA · 2010 to 2014
$2.3M
BARI II GRANT PROPOSAL FOR ECG CORE LABORATORYU01HL061746 · NHLBI · SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY · PI CHAITMAN, BERNARD R · 2000 to 2008
$1.6M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL102334NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL061744NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL061746NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL061748NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL063804
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes trial demonstrated similar long-term clinical effectiveness of revascularization (REV) and intensive medical (MED) therapy. Comparisons of post-intervention ischemic burden have not been explored but are relevant to treatment decisions. This study examined differences in 1-year stress myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) abnormalities by randomized treatment.

methodsMPS was performed in 1,505 patients at 1-year following randomization. MPS images were analyzed (masked to treatment) by a Nuclear Core Laboratory using a quantitative percent (%) of total, ischemic, and scarred myocardium. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the relationship between MPS variables and trial endpoints.

resultsAt 1-year, nearly all REV patients underwent the assigned procedure; while 16% of those randomized to MED received coronary REV. Patients randomized to REV exhibited fewer stress perfusion abnormalities than MED patients (P < .001). CABG patients had more frequent ischemic and scarred myocardium encumbering ≥ 5% of the myocardium when compared to those receiving PCI. Patients randomized to MED had more extensive ischemia and the median % of the myocardium with perfusion abnormalities was lower following REV (3% vs 9%, P = .01). A total of 59% of REV patients had no inducible ischemia at 1-year compared to 49% of MED patients (P < .001). Within the CABG stratum, those randomized to MED had the greatest rate of ischemic (P = .032) and scarred (P = .017) perfusion abnormalities. At 1-year, more extensive and severe stress myocardial perfusion abnormalities were associated with higher 5-year rates of death and a combined endpoint of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) rates (11.3%, 8.1%, 6.8%, for ≥ 10%, 5%-9.9%, and 1-4.9% abnormal myocardium at stress, respectively, P < .001). In adjusted models, selected MPS variables were significantly associated with an increased hazard of cardiac death or MI (hazard ratio = 1.11 per 5% increase in abnormal myocardium at stress, P = .004).

conclusionsPatient management strategies that focus on ischemia resolution can be useful to guide the efficacy of near-term therapeutic approaches. A 1-year post-therapeutic intervention myocardial perfusion scan provides important information regarding prognosis in stable CAD patients with diabetes.

Indexed as

Ventricular Function, LeftAgedAngioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCicatrixCoronary DiseaseDiabetes ComplicationsDiabetes MellitusFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial IschemiaMyocardial Perfusion ImagingMyocardiumPrognosisProportional Hazards Models

Identifiers

PMID22527794
PMCPMC4135719

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.