ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2023
Clinical Application of Myocardial Perfusion SPECT in Patients with Suspected or Known Coronary Artery Disease. What Role in the Multimodality Imaging Era?
Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Correlation Between Epicardial Adipose Tissue and PET Cardiac Perfusion: A Systematic Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Relationship between epicardial adipose tissue and coronary function evaluated with [13 N]NH3 PET/CT.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Article
- A comprehensive review of ischemic heart disease: pathophysiology, current treatments, natural products-based therapies, and nanotherapeutics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Volumetric Reference Ranges for SPECT MPI Parameters and the Predictive Power of Dyssynchrony Parameters: A Cross-Sectional StudyCurrent medical imaging · 2026Article
- Effect of patent complete revascularization on myocardium with persistent perfusion defects in preoperative single-photon emission computed tomography.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
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
Myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is widely used in assessing coronary artery disease (CAD) owing to its proven efficacy in extensive clinical experience. Like other functional tests, myocardial SPECT is recommended for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD, risk stratification assessment, and treatment decision making. Besides quantifying left ventricular volume, global and regional function by electrocardiography (ECG)-gated acquisition, myocardial SPECT can identify myocardial ischemia, scars, stunning, and viable hibernating myocardium. It provides comprehensive functional data across the spectrum of CAD and a cost-effective strategy in patients with intermediate pre-test probability of CAD or with a history of ischemic cardiomyopathy. With ongoing advances in cardiovascular prevention and risk factor management many patients referred for testing now have a low-to-intermediate probability of CAD. Besides, CAD has become a chronic condition resulting from novel therapeutic strategies. Against this background, approaches combining anatomical and functional tests in sequence or simultaneously include coronary artery calcium score integrated with perfusion imaging or fusion SPECT/coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). In this review we summarize current indications for myocardial perfusion SPECT and integration of SPECT with other imaging techniques to improve diagnostic performance, patient management, and outcome prediction in CAD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.