Trial reportTrials2017
Magnetic resonance Adenosine perfusion imaging as Gatekeeper of invasive coronary intervention (MAGnet): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02580851 (Magnetic Resonance Adenosine Perfusion Imaging as Gatekeeper of Invasive Coronary Intervention), which is not on this 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.
Magnetic Resonance Adenosine Perfusion Imaging as Gatekeeper of Invasive Coronary Intervention
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessment of the Efficiency of Non-Invasive Diagnostic Imaging Modalities for Detecting Myocardial Ischemia in Patients Suspected of Having Stable Angina.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) recommend functional stress testing for risk stratification prior to revascularization procedures. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is a modality of choice for stress testing because of its capability to detect myocardial ischemia sensitively and specifically. Nevertheless, evidence from randomized trials evaluating a CMR-based management of stable CAD patients in comparison to a more common angiography-based approach still is limited. METHODS/
designPatients presenting themselves with symptoms indicating a stable CAD and a class I or IIa indication for diagnostic coronary angiography are prospectively screened and enrolled in the study. All subjects receive a basic cardiological work-up and guideline-directed medical therapy. A 1:1 randomization in two groups is being performed. Patients in group 1 undergo diagnostic coronary angiography and subsequent revascularization according to current guidelines. Subjects in group 2 undergo adenosine stress CMR and in case of myocardial ischemia are sent to coronary angiography. Follow-up is planned for 3 years. During this time, the number of primary endpoints (defined as cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarction) and unplanned invasive procedures will be documented. Furthermore, symptom burden and quality of life will be assessed by use of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire. Sample size is calculated to prove non-inferiority of the CMR-based approach. DISCUSSION: In case this study is able to accomplish its aim to prove non-inferiority of the CMR-based management in patients with stable CAD; the importance of this emerging modality may further increase.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02580851 . Registered on 14 October 2015. Unique Protocol ID: 237/11.
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.