SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2017
Prognostic value of normal positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expanding interpretability through complexity reduction in machine learning-based modelling of cardiovascular disease: A myocardial perfusion imaging PET/CT prognostic study.European journal of clinical investigation · 2025Article
- 2023 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology on the Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Coronary Syndrome.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2023Article
- Global and segmental absolute stress myocardial blood flow in prediction of cardiac events: [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Myocardial perfusion in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: comparison between 320-MDCT and rubidium-82 PET.European radiology · 2018Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSeveral studies have confirmed high diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography (PET) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. However, whether the superior diagnostic accuracy could translate into improved mortality outcomes remains unknown. The aim of this study was to define the prognostic value of normal PET MPI.
methodsPubMed and EMBASE were searched to identify related studies up to June 2016. All studies using PET MPI to evaluate subjects with known or suspected coronary artery disease and providing absolute number of patients with a negative test and primary data on clinical outcomes with a follow-up time ≥3 months were included for analysis.
resultsThe search yielded 11 studies comprising 20,471 patients for final analysis. The negative-predictive value (NPV) for cardiac death, all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were 98.80% [95% confidence interval (CI), 97.64%-99.39%], 94.89% (95% CI: 92.99-96.30%) and 90.26% (95% CI: 78.01-96.03%), over 36.9 months of follow-up for cardiac death, over 26.8 months for all-cause death and 35.7 months for MACE. The corresponding annualized event rates were 0.39%, 2.29% and 3.27%, respectively. In subgroup analyses of different imaging analysis methods for PET MPI, studies using perfusion abnormity had a similar NPV as compared with those using coronary flow reserve (98.46% vs 98.86%, p-value = NS), with a corresponding annualized event rate after negative tests (equal to 1 - NPV) as 0.45% and 0.42%, respectively.
conclusionNormal PET has a high NPV for cardiac death, MACE and all-cause mortality. Different indexes used for PET imaging analysis have a comparable prognostic value. Advances in knowledge: A normal PET MPI conferred a very low risk of cardiac death of 0.39% per year, which is close to that of a normal aged-matched population.
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.