ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2016
Outcome of patients with high-risk Duke treadmill score and normal myocardial perfusion imaging on spect.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Update of the Brazilian Guideline on Nuclear Cardiology - 2020.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2020Guideline
- Article
- Review of cardiovascular imaging in the journal of nuclear cardiology in 2016: Part 2 of 2-myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017Review
- Exercise and Bayes' Theorem: Some things never go out of style.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2016Article
- Review of Cardiovascular Imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2015-Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2016Article
- Higher event rate in patients with high-risk Duke Treadmill Score despite normal exercise-gated myocardial perfusion imaging.World journal of nuclear medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnnual mortality rate can range from <1% for patients with normal myocardial perfusion by SPECT to >5% based on a high-risk Duke treadmill score (DTS). Information on the prognosis of patients with the combination of HRDTS and normal SPECT is limited and is the purpose of this study.
methodsData from a large nuclear cardiology registry (n = 17,972 patients) were reviewed. A total of 340 had HRDTS (score ≤ -11) while undergoing SPECT. Combined cardiovascular mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiovascular mortality alone were available in 310 patients at a mean follow-up of 4.01 ± 1.5 years.
resultsThe majority of the patients had abnormal SPECT (n = 270, 71%). The abnormal SPECT patients compared to the normal were older (65.6 vs 62.8 years of age; P = .025), more likely to have abnormal left ventricular ejection fraction (26.1% vs 0%; P < .0001), known coronary artery disease (CAD, 35.9% vs 7.8%; P < .0001) and lower DTS (-14.5 vs -13.2; P = .0006), Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated a significantly lower cardiovascular mortality (5.4% vs 0%, P = .02) and combined outcome of MI and cardiovascular mortality (15% vs 4.4%, P = .009) in patients with normal versus abnormal SPECT.
conclusionsHigh-risk DTS is associated with abnormal perfusion SPECT in most patients, but nearly one-third of the patients had normal perfusion. Patients with a normal SPECT had a lower cardiovascular event rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26037600What 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.