ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2015
Longitudinal myocardial blood flow gradient and CAD detection.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2015. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- All that glisters is not gold: the elusive difference between statistics and pathophysiology.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Quantitative flow ratio derived pullback pressure gradient and CZT-SPECT measured longitudinal flow gradient for hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Quantitative myocardial blood flow with Rubidium-82 PET: a clinical perspective.American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conventional myocardial perfusion scintigraphy with SPECT/CT or with PET/CT has been established as pivotal clinical imaging modality for the identification of hemodynamically obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and risk stratification of patients with suspected or known CAD. While the assessment of the relative distribution of radiotracer uptake in the left-ventricular (LV) myocardium during vasomotor stress identifies the "culprit" or most severe CAD lesion in multivessel disease, flow-limiting effects of remaining but less severe epicardial lesions may be missed. This limitation principally may be overcome by the possibility of PET/CT with radiotracer-kinetic modeling to concurrently assess left-ventricular (LV) myocardial blood flow (MBF) in ml/g/min at rest and during vasomotor stress and the resulting myocardial flow reserve (MFR). While a stress-induced regional reduction in radiotracer uptake or perfusion identifies the most advanced epicardial lesion, flow-limiting effects of the other epicardial lesions may principally be identified by regional reductions in MFR. Conversely, reductions in MFR in CAD may be appreciated as suboptimal as they reflect not only the consequences of flow-limiting effects of epicardial stenosis but also of microvascular dysfunction. The relatively low specificity of a reduced therefore MFR may hamper a clear identification of the downstream hemodynamic effects of an epicardial lesion on hyperemic coronary flow increases. In this scenario, there is increasing evidence that the PET assessment of an abnormal decrease in MBF from the base to the apex of the LV during hyperemic flows, a so-called longitudinal flow gradient, is primarily related to fluid dynamic consequences of CAD-induced diffuse luminal and/or focal narrowing of the epicardial artery. The combined evaluation of the MFR and corresponding longitudinal MBF gradient could emerge as new a novel analytic concept to further optimize the identification and characterization of hemodynamic CAD burden in multivessel disease, which, however, warrants further clinical validation.
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.