ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Versus Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography for Detecting Coronary Artery Disease and Myocardial Ischemia: Comparison with Coronary Angiography.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Value ofPediatric cardiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Cardiac Troponins for the Clinical Management of Patients with Claudication and without Cardiac Symptoms.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Myocardial Function Prediction After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Using MRI Radiomic Features and Machine Learning Algorithms.Journal of digital imaging · 2022Article
- Cardiac MRI: technical basis.La Radiologia medica · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of stress single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) for the assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in the same patients, using coronary angiography as the reference standard.
methodsThirty patients with known or suspected CAD who were referred for exercise SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) for the evaluation of myocardial ischemia underwent stress CMR MPI and computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) or selective coronary angiography (SCA). The data from the two stress modalities were compared against the data from angiography.
resultsIn our study population, 30% of the recruited subjects had significant CAD. The CMR sensitivity for the detection of significant CAD and/or myocardial ischemia was 89% and specificity was 76%. For SPECT, the corresponding sensitivity was 78% and specificity was 52%. The negative predictive value was 92% for CMR and 83% for SPECT. The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis evaluating the presence of significant CAD, CMR (area under the curve (AUC) 0.78) outperformed SPECT (AUC 0.59) (p < 0.01). The ROC analysis evaluating the presence of myocardial ischemia was also in favor of CMR (AUC 0.82) versus SPECT (AUC 0.67) (p < 0.01).
conclusionsCMR has high diagnostic accuracy for the detection of CAD and stress-induced ischemia and appears to outperform SPECT. CMR may thus be the preferred noninvasive imaging modality to assess patients with known or suspected CAD.
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.