ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2026
Clinical utility and impact of myocardial viability imaging with F-18 FDG positron emission tomography to predict left ventricular function improvement following revascularization in ischemic heart disease : a single center retrospective study.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies have questioned the benefit of myocardial viability identification and its clinical impact on revascularization decisions. We aimed to evaluate whether F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (F-18 FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) influences real-world revascularization decisions and whether PET-defined viability helps predict improvement in ejection fraction (LVEF). We conducted a retrospective chart review of Rubidium-82 (Rb-82)/F-18 FDG PET ischemia and viability studies performed from 2020 to 2024 at our institution. Baseline characteristics including comorbidities, ejection fraction (EF) at 3 months and 1 year and PET study results were evaluated. Among patients with viability, a linear mixed-effects model adjusted for baseline EF was performed to assess temporal changes and treatment strategy interaction. One hundred and eleven patients underwent rest-stress Rb-82 PET with F-18 FDG PET imaging, of whom 99 received FDG for myocardial viability assessment. Among these patients, 65 (65.6%) demonstrated ischemic viable myocardium, while 31 (31.3%) had non-viable myocardium. Viability-positive patients were more likely to undergo revascularization (57% (n = 37) vs. 36% (n = 28) received medical therapy only). At 3-month follow-up, both revascularization and medical therapy were associated with significant improvement in LVEF among viability-positive patients. In contrast, viability-negative patients did not demonstrate significant EF improvement. Among viability-positive patients with both 3-month and 1- year EF measurements (N = 28), linear mixed-effects model adjusted for baseline EF revealed that baseline EF was a strong independent predictor of follow-up EF (p < 0.0001). From 3 months to 1 year, the revascularization group demonstrated a significant increase in EF (+ 4.28%, p = 0.014), whereas the medical therapy group showed a non-significant change (+ 1.40%, p = 0.53). However, the overall EF improvement did not differ significantly between groups after adjustment (p = 0.30). EF changes in viability-negative patients remained non-significant over time. Symptomatic improvement was documented in 55.3% of viability-positive patients. Our single-center experience shows that FDG-PET viability test continues to guide management and decision making regarding revascularization and can predict functional recovery and symptomatic improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42891868What 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.