ArticleHeart and vessels2016
Safety and optimal protocol of provocation test for diagnosis of multivessel coronary spasm.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impacts of nicorandil on infarct myocardium in comparison with nitrate: assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.Heart and vessels · 2016Trial
- Changing clinical perspectives on sex and healthcare disparities in ischaemic heart disease.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Review
- Japanese Herbal Medicine (Kampo) as a Possible Treatment for Ischemia With Non-obstructive Coronary Artery Disease.Cureus · 2023Review
- Clinical Characteristics and Prognosis of Patients with Vasospastic Angina Subjected to the Spasm Provocation Test and the Unavoidable Use of Nitroglycerin.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Article
- Increased frequency of angina attacks caused by switching a brand-name vasodilator to a generic vasodilator in patients with vasospastic angina: Two case reports.World journal of cardiology · 2018Article
- Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation during intracoronary acetylcholine provocation test.Heart and vessels · 2017Article
- The real world in the clinic before and after the establishment of guidelines for coronary artery spasm: a questionnaire for members of the Japanese Cine-angio Association.Heart and vessels · 2017Article
- Feasibility of omitting provocation test with 50 μg of acetylcholine in left coronary artery.Heart and vessels · 2017Article
- Moderate vasomotor response to acetylcholine provocation test as an indicator of long-term prognosis.Heart and vessels · 2016Article
- Different characteristics of cardiac biomarkers to decide and predict the culprit lesions in patients with suspicious acute coronary syndrome.Heart and vessels · 2016Article
- Gender differences in sensitivity of acetylcholine and ergonovine to coronary spasm provocation test.Heart and vessels · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We examined the safety of acetylcholine (ACh) and ergonovine (ER) tests retrospectively and investigated the optimal protocol of provocation test for diagnosis of multivessel coronary spasm. We performed 1546 ACh tests and 1114 ER tests during 23 years. ACh was injected in incremental doses of 20/50/80 μg into the right coronary artery (RCA) and of 20/50/100/200 μg into the left coronary artery (LCA) over 20 s. ER was administered in total doses of 40 μg into the RCA and of 64 μg into the LCA over 2-4 min. When a coronary spasm was induced and did not resolve spontaneously within 3 min after the completion of ACh/ER injection, or when hemodynamic instability due to coronary spasms occurred, 2.5-5.0 mg of nitrate was administered into the responsible vessel. To relive provoked spasm, it is necessary to administer nitrate in 31 cases by ACh and in 76 cases by ER (2.0 vs. 6.8 %, p < 0.01) before another vessel attempts. Multivessel spasms were often observed in LCA testing than in RCA testing on both agents [ACh: 78.6 % (11/14) vs. 11.8 % (2/17), p < 0.001, ER: 37.8 % (14/37) vs. 20.5 % (8/39), ns]. Even after the administration of nitrates, positive coronary spasm was obtained in 21.1 % by ACh and 52.9 % by ER tests on another coronary artery. No irreversible complications were recognized on both tests. We should firstly perform spasm provocation tests in the LCA and we may be able to diagnose another vessel spasm by performing the complete spasm provocation tests after the administration of nitrates to relieve provoked spasm in the first attempt.
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.