ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Prognostic value of negative stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with moderate-severe coronary artery stenosis.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. 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.
- Stress cardiac magnetic resonance vs. fractional flow reserve-guided management for intermediate coronary stenosis: a single-center retrospective propensity-matched study with 12-month follow-up.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) without inducible ischemia in a real-world cohort of patients with known severe coronary artery stenosis. Background: The prognosis of patients with severe coronary artery stenosis and without inducible ischemia using stress CMR remains uncertain, even though its identification of functionally significant coronary artery disease (CAD) is excellent. Materials and methods: Patients without inducible ischemia and known CAD who underwent stress CMR between February 2015 and December 2016 were included in this retrospective study. These patients were divided into two groups: group 1 with stenosis of 50%-75% and group 2 with stenosis of >75%. The primary endpoint was defined as the occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) [cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)]. Results: Real-world data collected from 169 patients with a median age of 69 (60-75) years were included. The median follow-up was 5.5 (IQR 4.1-6.6) years. Events occurred after a mean time of 3.0 ± 2.2 years in group 1 and 3.7 ± 2.0 years in group 2 ( Conclusion: The findings of this pilot study suggest that long-term outcomes in a real-world patient cohort with known severe and moderate coronary artery stenosis but without inducible ischemia were similar. Stress CMR may provide valuable risk stratification in patients with angiographically significant but hemodynamically non-obstructive coronary lesions.
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.