Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26285057›Full record

Trial reportJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2016

Factors associated with false-negative cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion studies: A Clinical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging in coronary artery disease (CE-MARC) substudy.

Ananth Kidambi, Steven Sourbron, Neil Maredia, Manish Motwani, Julia M Brown, Jane Nixon, Colin C Everett, Sven Plein, John P Greenwood

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Assessment of stress adequacy with adenosine: Does the answer lie in the spleen?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. MRI perfusion in patients with stable chest-pain.The British journal of radiology · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Is heart rate response a reliable marker of adenosine-induced coronary hyperemia?The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Splenic T1-mapping: a novel quantitative method for assessing adenosine stress adequacy for cardiovascular magnetic resonance.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ananth KidambiMultidisciplinary Cardiovascular Research Centre & the Division of Cardiovascular and Diabetes Research, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Steven SourbronDivision of Medical Physics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Neil MarediaMultidisciplinary Cardiovascular Research Centre & the Division of Cardiovascular and Diabetes Research, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Manish MotwaniMultidisciplinary Cardiovascular Research Centre & the Division of Cardiovascular and Diabetes Research, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Julia M BrownClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Jane NixonClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Colin C EverettClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Sven PleinMultidisciplinary Cardiovascular Research Centre & the Division of Cardiovascular and Diabetes Research, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
John P GreenwoodMultidisciplinary Cardiovascular Research Centre & the Division of Cardiovascular and Diabetes Research, Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/10/62/28409British Heart Foundation FS/1062/28409British Heart Foundation RG/05/004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo examine factors associated with false-negative cardiovascular magnetic resonance (MR) perfusion studies within the large prospective Clinical Evaluation of MR imaging in Coronary artery disease (CE-MARC) study population. Myocardial perfusion MR has excellent diagnostic accuracy to detect coronary heart disease (CHD). However, causes of false-negative MR perfusion studies are not well understood. MATERIALS AND

methodsCE-MARC prospectively recruited patients with suspected CHD and mandated MR, myocardial perfusion scintigraphy, and invasive angiography. This subanalysis identified all patients with significant coronary stenosis by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and MR perfusion (1.5T, T1 -weighted gradient echo), using the original blinded image read. We explored patient and imaging characteristics related to false-negative or true-positive MR perfusion results, with reference to QCA. Multivariate regression analysis assessed the likelihood of false-negative MR perfusion according to four characteristics: poor image quality, triple-vessel disease, inadequate hemodynamic response to adenosine, and Duke jeopardy score (angiographic myocardium-at-risk score).

resultsIn all, 265 (39%) patients had significant angiographic disease (mean age 62, 79% male). Thirty-five (5%) had false-negative and 230 (34%) true-positive MR perfusion. Poor MR perfusion image quality, triple-vessel disease, and inadequate hemodynamic response were similar between false-negative and true-positive groups (odds ratio, OR [95% confidence interval, CI]: 4.1 (0.82-21.0), P = 0.09; 1.2 (0.20-7.1), P = 0.85, and 1.6 (0.65-3.8), P = 0.31, respectively). Mean Duke jeopardy score was significantly lower in the false-negative group (2.6 ± 1.7 vs. 5.4 ± 3.0, OR 0.34 (0.21-0.53), P < 0.0001).

conclusionFalse-negative cardiovascular MR perfusion studies are uncommon, and more common in patients with lower angiographic myocardium-at-risk. In CE-MARC, poor image quality, triple-vessel disease, and inadequate hemodynamic response were not significantly associated with false-negative MR perfusion.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAgedAngiographyCardiovascular SystemCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseFalse Negative ReactionsFemaleHemodynamicsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioPerfusionProspective Studiescardiovascular magnetic resonancecoronary diseaseischemiamagnetic resonance imagingperfusion

Identifiers

PMID26285057
PMCPMC4762538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.