OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of age, gender, body mass index, and diabetes on the safety and efficacy of regadenoson stress myocardial perfusion imaging, and to assess the noninferiority of regadenoson to adenosine for the detection of reversible myocardial perfusion defects. BACKGROUND: Previous reports have shown that a fixed unit bolus of regadenoson is safe and noninferior to adenosine for the detection of reversible perfusion defects by radionuclide imaging. METHODS: Using a database of 2,015 patients, we evaluated the effects of age, gender, body mass index, and diabetes on the safety and efficacy of regadenoson compared to adenosine. RESULTS: For detection of ischemia relative to adenosine, noninferiority was demonstrated for all patients (agreement rate difference 0%, 95% CI -6.2% to +6.8%). The average agreement rate between adenosine-adenosine and adenosine-regadenoson were 0.62 +/- 0.03 and 0.63 +/- 0.02. Detection of ischemia was also comparable in specific subgroups. Agreement was less for both agents in women versus men with moderate and large areas of ischemia. Compared to adenosine, regadenoson had a lower combined symptom score and less chest pain, flushing, and throat, neck, or jaw pain, but more headache and gastrointestinal discomfort. This was true in nearly all subgroups. Regadenoson patients reported feeling more comfortable (1.7 +/- .02 vs. 1.9 +/- 0.03, p < 0.001). Based on the overall tolerability score, women felt less comfortable than men with both stress agents. Image quality was rated good or excellent in 92% for both agents. CONCLUSIONS:Regadenoson can be safely administered as a fixed unit bolus and is as efficacious as adenosine in detecting ischemia regardless of age, gender, body mass index, and diabetes. Regadenoson is better tolerated overall and across various subgroups.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of age, gender, body mass index, and diabetes on the safety and efficacy of regadenoson stress myocardial perfusion imaging, and to assess the noninferiority of regadenoson to adenosine for the detection of reversible myocardial perfusion defects. BACKGROUND: Previous reports have shown that a fixed unit bolus of regadenoson is safe and noninferior to adenosine for the detection of reversible perfusion defects by radionuclide imaging. METHODS: Using a database of 2,015 patients, we evaluated the effects of age, gender, body mass index, and diabetes on the safety and efficacy of regadenoson compared to adenosine. RESULTS: For detection of ischemia relative to adenosine, noninferiority was demonstrated for all patients (agreement rate difference 0%, 95% CI -6.2% to +6.8%). The average agreement rate between adenosine-adenosine and adenosine-regadenoson were 0.62 +/- 0.03 and 0.63 +/- 0.02. Detection of ischemia was also comparable in specific subgroups. Agreement was less for both agents in women versus men with moderate and large areas of ischemia. Compared to adenosine, regadenoson had a lower combined symptom score and less chest pain, flushing, and throat, neck, or jaw pain, but more headache and gastrointestinal discomfort. This was true in nearly all subgroups. Regadenosonpatients reported feeling more comfortable (1.7 +/- .02 vs. 1.9 +/- 0.03, p < 0.001). Based on the overall tolerability score, women felt less comfortable than men with both stress agents. Image quality was rated good or excellent in 92% for both agents. CONCLUSIONS:Regadenoson can be safely administered as a fixed unit bolus and is as efficacious as adenosine in detecting ischemia regardless of age, gender, body mass index, and diabetes. Regadenoson is better tolerated overall and across various subgroups.
Authors: Joseph C Lee; John F Fraser; Adrian G Barnett; Leslie P Johnson; Melinda G Wilson; Catherine M McHenry; Darren L Walters; Christopher R Warnholtz; Frederick A Khafagi Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: John J Ryan; Rupa Mehta; Thejasvi Thiruvoipati; R Parker Ward; Kim Allan Williams Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: E Gordon Depuey; John J Mahmarian; Todd D Miller; Andrew J Einstein; Christopher L Hansen; Thomas A Holly; Edward J Miller; Donna M Polk; L Samuel Wann Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: John J Lazarus; Ashraf Saleh; Michael Ghannam; Keith Aaronson; Monica Colvin; Frank Pagani; Todd Koelling; James R Corbett; Richard L Weinberg; Venkatesh L Murthy; Matthew C Konerman Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 5.952