ArticleJAMA cardiology2020
Evaluation of Stress Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Risk Reclassification of Patients With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease.
Article in JAMA cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Association of left ventricular mass with discordant stress cardiac magnetic resonance and coronary angiography.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2026Observational
- Myocardial Viability and Ischaemia in Chronic Total Occlusion.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Article
- Coronary anatomy detects, ischemia predicts: Real-world insights from the Nancy ischemia registry.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
- Additive effect of coronary artery stenosis on left ventricular myocardial strain in patients with essential hypertension: an analysis of cardiac MRI feature tracking.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Regional variability of cardiovascular magnetic resonance access and utilization in the United States.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024Observational
- Prognostic value of stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with prediabetes and suspected coronary artery disease.PloS one · 2024Article
- The Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Registry at 150,000.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024Article
- Comparison of Stress-Rest and Stress-LGE Analysis Strategy in Patients Undergoing Stress Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging · 2023Article
- Evolving Diagnostic and Management Advances in Coronary Heart Disease.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Cardiovascular perspectives on stem cell transplant and Car-T cell therapy: The old and the new for assessment and management.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2022Article
- 30-minute CMR for common clinical indications: a Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance white paper.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2022Article
- Cardiac MRI assessment of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Prognostic value of stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance in asymptomatic patients without known coronary artery disease.European radiology · 2021Article
- Evidence and Applicability of Stress Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Detecting Coronary Artery Disease: State of the Art.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Native T1 mapping and extracellular volume fraction for differentiation of myocardial diseases from normal CMR controls in routine clinical practice.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2021Article
- Long-term prognostic value of stress perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients without known coronary artery disease.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 19 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: The role of stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in clinical decision-making by reclassification of risk across American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline-recommended categories has not been established. Objective: To examine the utility of stress CMR imaging for risk reclassification in patients without a history of coronary artery disease (CAD) who presented with suspected myocardial ischemia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective, multicenter cohort study with median follow-up of 5.4 years (interquartile range, 4.6-6.9) was conducted at 13 centers across 11 US states. Participants included 1698 consecutive patients aged 35 to 85 years with 2 or more coronary risk factors but no history of CAD who presented with suspected myocardial ischemia to undergo stress CMR imaging. The study was conducted from February 18, 2019, to March 1, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiovascular (CV) death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI). Major adverse CV events (MACE) including CV death, nonfatal MI, hospitalization for heart failure or unstable angina, and late, unplanned coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Results: Of the 1698 patients, 873 were men (51.4%); mean (SD) age was 62 (11) years, accounting for 67 CV death/nonfatal MIs and 190 MACE. Clinical models of pretest risk were constructed and patients were categorized using guideline-based categories of low (<1% per year), intermediate (1%-3% per year), and high (>3% year) risk. Stress CMR imaging provided risk reclassification across all baseline models. For CV death/nonfatal MI, adding stress CMR-assessed left ventricular ejection fraction, presence of ischemia, and late gadolinium enhancement to a model incorporating the validated CAD Consortium score, hypertension, smoking, and diabetes provided significant net reclassification improvement of 0.266 (95% CI, 0.091-0.441) and C statistic improvement of 0.086 (95% CI, 0.022-0.149). Stress CMR imaging reclassified 60.3% of patients in the intermediate pretest risk category (52.4% reclassified as low risk and 7.9% as high risk) with corresponding changes in the observed event rates of 0.6% per year for low posttest risk and 4.9% per year for high posttest risk. For MACE, stress CMR imaging further provided significant net reclassification improvement (0.361; 95% CI, 0.255-0.468) and C statistic improvement (0.092; 95% CI, 0.054-0.131), and reclassified 59.9% of patients in the intermediate pretest risk group (48.7% reclassified as low risk and 11.2% as high risk). Conclusions and Relevance: In this multicenter cohort of patients with no history of CAD presenting with suspected myocardial ischemia, stress CMR imaging reclassified patient risk across guideline-based risk categories, beyond clinical risk factors. The findings of this study support the value of stress CMR imaging for clinical decision-making, especially in patients at intermediate risk for CV death and nonfatal MI.
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.