PURPOSE: To evaluate differences in side-effects and hemodynamic response between men and women undergoing regadenoson-stress SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). METHODS: The initial population of the study included 858 consecutive patients who underwent regadenoson-stress MPI at our institution. These patients underwent prospective assessment and classification of regadenoson-induced side-effects in six categories and recording of heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) before and after regadenoson administration. From this initial population, after adjustment with 1:1 propensity matching using gender as the dependent variable and age, BMI, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, smoking, presence of coronary artery disease, LVEF, baseline systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) and HR, on-going use of cardio-active medications during test, and abnormal MPI scan as independent variables, a population of 279 pairs of opposite gender was formed and studied. RESULTS: Compared with men, women had a significantly higher rate of any side-effect (71% vs. 58%, p = 0.002), chest pain (23% vs. 12%, p < 0.001), gastrointestinal discomfort (20% vs. 12%, p = 0.01), dizziness (12% vs. 5%, p = 0.002), and headache (20% vs. 13%, p = 0.03) and similar rates of dyspnea and other side-effects. Women demonstrated a higher median HR-response compared with men (41% (- 8, 127) vs. 34% (- 5, 106), p = 0.001) while men demonstrated a lower median systolic BP response (- 3% (- 27, 48) vs. 0% (- 36, 68), p = 0.02) compared with women. CONCLUSIONS: Gender is independently associated with a differential response to regadenoson with regard to overall side-effects and HR-response. These observations have the potential of important management and prognostic implications respectively.
PURPOSE: To evaluate differences in side-effects and hemodynamic response between men and women undergoing regadenoson-stress SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). METHODS: The initial population of the study included 858 consecutive patients who underwent regadenoson-stress MPI at our institution. These patients underwent prospective assessment and classification of regadenoson-induced side-effects in six categories and recording of heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) before and after regadenoson administration. From this initial population, after adjustment with 1:1 propensity matching using gender as the dependent variable and age, BMI, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, smoking, presence of coronary artery disease, LVEF, baseline systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) and HR, on-going use of cardio-active medications during test, and abnormal MPI scan as independent variables, a population of 279 pairs of opposite gender was formed and studied. RESULTS: Compared with men, women had a significantly higher rate of any side-effect (71% vs. 58%, p = 0.002), chest pain (23% vs. 12%, p < 0.001), gastrointestinal discomfort (20% vs. 12%, p = 0.01), dizziness (12% vs. 5%, p = 0.002), and headache (20% vs. 13%, p = 0.03) and similar rates of dyspnea and other side-effects. Women demonstrated a higher median HR-response compared with men (41% (- 8, 127) vs. 34% (- 5, 106), p = 0.001) while men demonstrated a lower median systolic BP response (- 3% (- 27, 48) vs. 0% (- 36, 68), p = 0.02) compared with women. CONCLUSIONS: Gender is independently associated with a differential response to regadenoson with regard to overall side-effects and HR-response. These observations have the potential of important management and prognostic implications respectively.
Authors: Viviany R Taqueti; Sharmila Dorbala; David Wolinsky; Brian Abbott; Gary V Heller; Timothy M Bateman; Jennifer H Mieres; Lawrence M Phillips; Nanette K Wenger; Leslee J Shaw Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2017-06-05 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Ami E Iskandrian; Timothy M Bateman; Luiz Belardinelli; Brent Blackburn; Manuel D Cerqueira; Robert C Hendel; Hsiao Lieu; John J Mahmarian; Ann Olmsted; S Richard Underwood; João Vitola; Whedy Wang Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2007 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Nasir Hussain; Waseem Chaudhry; Alan W Ahlberg; Richard S Amara; Ahmed Elfar; Matthew W Parker; John A Savino; Ruwanthi Titano; Milena J Henzlova; William L Duvall Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2016-03-15 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: John J Mahmarian; Manuel D Cerqueira; Ami E Iskandrian; Timothy M Bateman; Gregory S Thomas; Robert C Hendel; Lemuel A Moye; Ann W Olmsted Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-08
Authors: John J Mahmarian; Leif E Peterson; Jiaqiong Xu; Manuel D Cerqueira; Ami E Iskandrian; Timothy M Bateman; Gregory S Thomas; Faisal Nabi Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Hein J Verberne; Wanda Acampa; Constantinos Anagnostopoulos; Jim Ballinger; Frank Bengel; Pieter De Bondt; Ronny R Buechel; Alberto Cuocolo; Berthe L F van Eck-Smit; Albert Flotats; Marcus Hacker; Cecilia Hindorf; Philip A Kaufmann; Oliver Lindner; Michael Ljungberg; Markus Lonsdale; Alain Manrique; David Minarik; Arthur J H A Scholte; Riemer H J A Slart; Elin Trägårdh; Tim C de Wit; Birger Hesse Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: M Brinkert; E Reyes; S Walker; K Latus; A Maenhout; R Mizumoto; C Nkomo; K Standbridge; K Wechalekar; S R Underwood Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-11-22 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Jose V Monmeneu Menadas; Maria P García Gonzalez; Maria P Lopez-Lereu; Laura Higueras Ortega; Alicia M Maceira Gonzalez Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-07-31 Impact factor: 2.357