ArticleOpen heart2026
Prognostic utility of stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease and inconclusive exercise stress testing.
Article in Open heart, 2026. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough exercise stress testing (EST) is commonly used for risk stratification in coronary artery disease (CAD), it yields inconclusive results in up to 20% of patients. Stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a comprehensive and accurate tool for evaluating CAD, but data on its use in patients with inconclusive EST results are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the prognostic value of stress perfusion CMR in patients with inconclusive EST results.
methodsConsecutive patients with known or suspected CAD and inconclusive EST results who were referred for stress perfusion CMR between 2009 and 2022 were studied. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of inducible myocardial ischaemia, as determined by CMR. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, hospitalisation for heart failure, and ischaemic stroke.
resultsA total of 414 patients (mean age 63±9 years, 48% male) were included, of whom 69 had myocardial ischaemia. Over a median follow-up of 6.9 years (IQR 4.5-9.9), 32 patients (7.7%) experienced MACE. Patients with myocardial ischaemia had a significantly higher annualised MACE rate than those without ischaemia (2.8 vs 0.8 per 100 patient-years, p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, myocardial ischaemia was an independent predictor of MACE (HR 4.03, 95% CI 1.94 to 8.38, p<0.001), along with atrial fibrillation (HR 5.83, 95% CI 1.69 to 20.09, p=0.005) and resting systolic blood pressure (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.005 to 1.04, p=0.01). Subgroup analysis demonstrated a consistent association between myocardial ischaemia and increased MACE risk across most subgroups (all p for interaction >0.05).
conclusionsStress perfusion CMR demonstrated prognostic value and effectively stratified risk in patients with known or suspected CAD who had inconclusive EST results. Stress perfusion CMR represents a valuable tool for this patient population.
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.