ArticleWorld journal of cardiology2022
Comparative efficacy and safety of adenosine and regadenoson for assessment of fractional flow reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in World journal of cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physiological indices for evaluating balloon angioplasty outcomes in below-the-knee artery lesions of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2026Article
- State of the art of CT myocardial perfusion.La Radiologia medica · 2025Review
- Differences in coronary microcirculation measurements during regadenoson vs. adenosine - induced hyperemia.Cardiology journal · 2025Article
- Functional assessment of coronary stenosis: alternative hyperemic, nonhyperemic, and angiographic indexes.REC, interventional cardiologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdenosine is a coronary hyperemic agent used to measure invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) of intermediate severity coronary stenosis.
aimTo compare FFR assessment using adenosine with an alternate hyperemic agent, regadenoson.
methodsPubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were queried for studies comparing adenosine and regadenoson for assessment of FFR. Data on FFR, correlation coefficient and adverse events from the selected studies were extracted and analyzed by means of random effects model. Two tailed
resultsFive studies with 248 patients were included in the final analysis. All included patients and coronary lesions underwent FFR assessment using both adenosine and regadenoson. There was no significant mean difference between FFR measurement by the two agents [odds ratio (OR) = -0.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): (-0.02)-0.01,
conclusionThe performance of regadenoson in inducing maximal hyperemia was comparable to that of adenosine. There was excellent correlation between the FFR measurements by both the agents. The use of adenosine, was however associated with higher risk of adverse events and longer time to FFR compared to regadenoson.
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.