ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2017
Rb-82 PET/CT left ventricular mass-to-volume ratios.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy using non-ECG-gatedJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Left ventricular (LV) mass:volume ratios indexed to body size (Mi/Vi) provide risk stratification for cardiac events. We sought to determine whether Rb-82 PET mass and volume indices are similar to MRI normal values for low likelihood subjects, and whether abnormal indices are related to abnormal myocardial blood flow (MBF). Data were analyzed retrospectively for 194 patients referred for rest/stress Rb-82 PET. LV EF, volume and mass values were calculated and mass:volume ratios were indexed to patients' height and weight. MBF was computed from the first pass dynamic component of PET data. 53 patients at low likelihood of CAD had PET Mi/Vi = 1.35 ± 0.27, consistent with the MRI literature range of 1.0-1.5. Compared to patients with normal indexed volume (Vi), patients with abnormally high Vi had lower rest MBF (0.56 ± 0.24 vs 0.93 ± 0.57 ml/g/min, p = 0.0001), and lower stress MBF (0.97 ± 0.52 vs. 1.83 ± 0.96 ml/g/min, p < 0.0001). Stress EF < 50% predicted abnormal Vi with 90% accuracy. Patients with Mi/Vi < 1.0 had abnormally low rest EF (45 ± 16% vs. 60 ± 15%, p < 0.0001) and low rest MBF (0.58 ± 0.25 vs. 0.96 ± 0.59 ml/g/min, p < 0.0001). In our study population, abnormal LV volume and mass correlated with lower rest and stress MBF and EF, suggesting that the pathophysiologic explanation of these patients' increased risk is more extensive obstructive CAD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28176182What 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.