Trial reportThe American journal of emergency medicine2026
Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging reduces radiation exposure in emergency department patients with chest pain: A secondary analysis from the CMR IMPACT trial.
Trial report in The American journal of emergency 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with chest pain who have an indeterminate (detectable to mildly elevated) troponin are often evaluated with tests that use ionizing radiation. We hypothesized that patients initially evaluated with stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging receive less ionizing radiation through one year of follow-up than those initially evaluated with invasive angiography.
methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of the CMR-IMPACT trial, which randomized adult patients at 4 U.S. sites (9/2013-7/2018) with a contemporary troponin of 0.006-1.0 ng/mL to either CMR imaging or invasive angiography. Cumulative radiation exposure from coronary computed tomography angiography, nuclear medicine stress imaging, cardiac catheterization, and percutaneous coronary intervention was assessed from index through one year using validated radiation dose estimates. Radiation doses at index and one year were compared between arms using linear regression adjusted for the stratification factors of initial troponin and known coronary artery disease in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations.
resultsDuring the study period, 312 patients were enrolled, with 156 randomized to each arm (CMR vs. invasive angiography). In the ITT analysis, patients in the CMR arm had less radiation exposure at index compared to patients in the invasive angiography arm (4.7 ± 5.7 mSv vs. 7.8 ± 5.8 mSv; p < 0.001). The difference in radiation exposure at one year was 7.5 ± 10.9 mSv vs. 9.5 ± 8.4 mSv (p = 0.06). In the PP analysis, patients receiving CMR (N = 102) had less radiation exposure than those receiving invasive angiography (N = 104) at index (3.5 ± 5.1 mSv vs. 9.3 ± 3.7 mSv; p < 0.001) and one year (5.8 ± 10.9 mSv vs. 11.2 ± 8.1 mSv; p < 0.001).
conclusionCMR was associated with decreased radiation exposure compared to invasive angiography.
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.