ReviewScientifica2012
Quantitative cardiac positron emission tomography: the time is coming!
Review in Scientifica, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of quantitative myocardial positron emission tomography for risk stratification in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a 2016 reappraisal.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Article
- Segmental quantitative myocardial perfusion with PET for the detection of significant coronary artery disease in patients with stable angina.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Article
- Impact of time-of-flight on qualitative and quantitative analyses of myocardial perfusion PET studies using (13)N-ammonia.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the last 20 years, the use of positron emission tomography (PET) has grown dramatically because of its oncological applications, and PET facilities are now easily accessible. At the same time, various groups have explored the specific advantages of PET in heart disease and demonstrated the major diagnostic and prognostic role of quantitation in cardiac PET. Nowadays, different approaches for the measurement of myocardial blood flow (MBF) have been developed and implemented in user-friendly programs. There is large evidence that MBF at rest and under stress together with the calculation of coronary flow reserve are able to improve the detection and prognostication of coronary artery disease. Moreover, quantitative PET makes possible to assess the presence of microvascular dysfunction, which is involved in various cardiac diseases, including the early stages of coronary atherosclerosis, hypertrophic and dilated cardiomyopathy, and hypertensive heart disease. Therefore, it is probably time to consider the routine use of quantitative cardiac PET and to work for defining its place in the clinical scenario of modern cardiology.
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.