ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2014
Predictive value of exercise myocardial perfusion imaging in the Medicare population: the impact of the ability to exercise.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2014. 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.
- Cardiovascular outcomes and mortality after abnormal myocardial perfusion scans in the elderly: a retrospective study at a tertiary care institution.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2023Article
- Prediction of angiographic coronary disease and mortality with a cadmium-zinc-telluride camera: a comparison of upright and supine ejection fractions and left ventricular volumes.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2023Article
- Diagnosis and risk stratification of coronary artery disease in Yemeni patients using treadmill test.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2020Article
- Prediction of 14-year cardiovascular outcomes by dobutamine stressJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018Article
- The potential value of discordant studies.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the prognostic value of quantitative single photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) with exercise and pharmacologic stress is well established, the prognostic and management value in the Medicare age population is less clear.
methodsThe prospectively populated Cleveland Clinic nuclear cardiology database was used to identify 5,994 consecutive pateints, age >65 years [1,664 (28%) exercise MPI, mean age 72.4±5.1, 74% male], who underwent MPI between January 2004 and January 2008. Clinical baseline variables, post test 90 days revascularization and MPI variables were analyzed. Overall and stratified nonparametric survival estimates were obtained by Kaplan-Meier method. Median follow-up time was 2.4 years. Parametric hazard modeling with bootstrap bagging methods was used to determine prognostic variables predicting mortality.
resultsThere was no difference in mortality in patients with an abnormal MPI vs. those with normal MPI. Amongst the patients who underwent exercise MPI, there were 103 (6%) deaths and 121 (8.2%) revascularizations. Only lower exercise capacity (<7 METs) and higher end systolic volume (ESV) predicted mortality. Although a larger amount of ischemia influenced down stream revascularization ischemia, revascularization of patients with an abnormal exercise MPI did not offer a survival benefit (log rank P value=0.01).
conclusionsIn the a Medicare age population, exercise MPI perfusion variables influenced rates of revascularization but failed to provide incremental significant risk-stratification beyond exercise capacity. Maximum METs achieved appears to be a better predictor of survival.
Indexed as
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.