Evidence mapPaperPMID 41801440Full record

ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026

Safety and tolerability of pharmacologic stress with the selective A

Sigmund Silber, Miriam Keller, Manuela Rippel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sigmund SilberCardiology Center Munich, Tal 21, 80331, Munich, Germany. sigmund@silber.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-2189-0593
Miriam KellerCardiology Center Munich, Tal 21, 80331, Munich, Germany.
Manuela RippelCardiology Center Munich, Tal 21, 80331, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study investigated the safety and tolerability of regadenoson for pharmacologic stress testing in the context of myocardial scintigraphy under routine clinical conditions in a cardiology practice in 5780 consecutive patients.

backgroundThe drug regadenoson was approved in Germany in 2010 for pharmacological stress testing in myocardial scintigraphy for patients who are unable to undergo adequate physical exercise. Previously, only dipyridamole or adenosine were available for diagnostic pharmacological vasodilation, but they were not approved for this indication.

methodsData on safety and tolerability were prospectively collected from consecutive patients referred for the assessment of myocardial ischemia using myocardial scintigraphy. Data were immediately entered into a dedicated computer program.

resultsAfter injection of regadenoson, there was a significant mean increase in heart rate from 70.2 ± 12.3 to a maximum of 94.6 ± 17.3 bpm. Systolic blood pressure dropped from 128.9 ± 16.2 to a minimum of 123.3 ± 20.3 mmHg. 86% of patients experienced any adverse effects, with the most frequent being dyspnea (64.2%), followed by headaches (20.7%), a sensation of warmth (20.2%), and numerous other, less frequent sensations. Bronchospasms were not observed, notably not in the 508 patients with COPD/ bronchial asthma. Asystole of > 6 s occurred in 2 patients (0.03%), which were both successfully terminated immediately with theophylline and atropine. There were no fatalities.

conclusionOverall, regadenoson demonstrated very good tolerability. The development of the selective A

Indexed as

AdenosineMyocardial ischemiaRegadenosonSafetyStress imaging

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.