ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2022
Non-contrast myocardial perfusion in rest and exercise stress using systolic flow-sensitive alternating inversion recovery.
Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate systolic flow-sensitive alternating inversion recovery (FAIR) during rest and exercise stress using 2RR (two cardiac cycles) or 1RR intervals between inversion pulse and imaging. MATERIALS AND
methods1RR and 2RR FAIR was implemented on a 3T scanner. Ten healthy subjects were scanned during rest and stress. Stress was performed using an in-bore ergometer. Heart rate, mean myocardial blood flow (MBF) and temporal signal-to-noise ratio (TSNR) were compared using paired t tests.
resultsMean heart rate during stress was higher than rest for 1RR FAIR (85.8 ± 13.7 bpm vs 63.3 ± 11.1 bpm; p < 0.01) and 2RR FAIR (83.8 ± 14.2 bpm vs 63.1 ± 10.6 bpm; p < 0.01). Mean stress MBF was higher than rest for 1RR FAIR (2.97 ± 0.76 ml/g/min vs 1.43 ± 0.6 ml/g/min; p < 0.01) and 2RR FAIR (2.8 ± 0.96 ml/g/min vs 1.22 ± 0.59 ml/g/min; p < 0.01). Resting mean MBF was higher for 1RR FAIR than 2RR FAIR (p < 0.05), but not during stress. TSNR was lower for stress compared to rest for 1RR FAIR (4.52 ± 2.54 vs 10.12 ± 3.69; p < 0.01) and 2RR FAIR (7.36 ± 3.78 vs 12.41 ± 5.12; p < 0.01). 2RR FAIR TSNR was higher than 1RR FAIR for rest (p < 0.05) and stress (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: We have demonstrated feasibility of systolic FAIR in rest and exercise stress. 2RR delay systolic FAIR enables non-contrast perfusion assessment during stress with relatively high TSNR.
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.