ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2022
Clinical experience with regadenoson SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging: insights into patient characteristics, safety, and impact of results on clinical management.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2022. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and tolerability of pharmacologic stress with the selective AClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Henry Ford Hospital (HFH) regadenoson (REG) registry includes patients with a variety of comorbidities allowing for the evaluation of outcomes in a large, unselected population. Using a database of electronic medical records and nuclear cardiology reports, patients aged > 18 years who underwent REG-facilitated single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) testing at HFH between January 2009 and August 2012 were identified. The primary objective was to describe the clinical and demographic characteristics of patients who had undergone REG only vs REG WALK (REG + low-level exercise) SPECT. A total of 2104 patients were included in the analysis (mean age 65.3 years; 50% women; 51% African American, 43% Caucasian). For the REG only (n = 1318) and REG WALK (n = 786) cohorts, SPECT was abnormal in 37% of patients (REG only, 39%; REG WALK, 34%; P < 0.01). No differences in diagnostic modalities or interventions in 90 days after SPECT were observed. Immediate safety analysis showed no deaths 48 h after REG SPECT testing. Although they guide invasive therapy, abnormal scans do not automatically lead to invasive testing. This demonstrates the focus on initial medical management, which reflects the existing evidence of initial goal-directed medical management of stable coronary disease.
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.