ArticleInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2026
Differences in Coronary Microvascular Spasms Induced by Acetylcholine and Ergonovine.
Article in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective There are no comparative studies on provoked coronary microvascular spasm (CMS) in patients undergoing both acetylcholine (ACh) and ergonovine (EM) vasoreactivity testing. We investigated the incidence of provoked CMS in patients with ischemia with nonobstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA) undergoing ACh and EM vasoreactivity testing. Methods We recruited 494 INOCA patients who underwent both ACh and EM vasoreactivity testing. ACh was injected at incremental doses of 20/50/100/200 μg into the left coronary artery (LCA) and 20/50/80 μg into the right coronary artery (RCA), whereas 40 μg of EM was administered into the RCA and 64 μg into the LCA. Positive CMS was defined as <75% transient coronary constriction, accompanied by typical chest symptoms or ischemic ECG changes. Results Among the 494 patients, CMS was observed in 23 (4.7%) patients. Eighteen patients had CMS alone, and 5 patients had coexisting epicardial spasm. The ACh test alone, EM test alone, and both tests provoked CMSs in 12 patients, 7 patients, and 4 patients, respectively. There were no marked differences in incidence between ACh- and EM-induced CMS (70% vs. 48%, p=0.2307). Conclusion Differences were observed between ACh-induced CMS and EM-induced CMS. The complementary use of vasoreactivity testing is essential for accurately documenting the presence of CMS in real-world settings.
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.