ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Incremental value of dedicated [
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rest/stress [ Methods: In this retrospective study, we analyzed 174 patients-totaling 2,958 myocardial segments-who underwent both protocols. Intermodality correlation was assessed, and the rates of segmental and patient-level reclassification (segments converting from <50% maximum uptake on sestamibi to ≥50% maximum uptake on thallium) were quantified. Results: While a moderately high correlation was observed between the baseline uptake scores of the two modalities (Spearman's r = 0.817 for rest sestamibi vs. thallium), thallium imaging provided substantial additional information, with 48.0% of segments classified as fixed defects on sestamibi SPECT demonstrating improved uptake on thallium SPECT. At the patient level, 78.9% of individuals who had fixed defects on the initial sestamibi SPECT had at least one segment reclassified. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that a rest sestamibi uptake score of <20% predicted a lack of reclassification with 99% specificity, although with low sensitivity (12%). Conclusion: In a selected cohort of patients presenting with fixed defects on standard rest/stress sestamibi SPECT MPI, supplementary imaging with thallium myocardial CZT SPECT provided incremental data, altering the clinical interpretation in nearly 80% of patients. However, in the absence of an independent viability reference standard, this finding represents intertracer diagnostic reclassification rather than proven functional recovery. A rest sestamibi uptake of <20% demonstrated high specificity for non-reclassification; however, this cutoff should be interpreted cautiously as a potential gatekeeping finding when considering downstream testing rather than a rigid rule for omitting further myocardial viability evaluation.
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.