| Title |
Type 2 diabetes mellitus correlates with systolic function during myocardial stress perfusion scanning with Nitrogen-13 ammonia PET
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-016-0482-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luis Eduardo Juárez-Orozco, Friso M. van der Zant, Riemer H. J. A. Slart, Sergiy V. Lazarenko, Erick Alexanderson, Rene A. Tio, Remco J. J. Knol |
| Abstract |
The influence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) on systolic function is partially determined by the coronary vasodilator function, nevertheless, an independent effect is suspected. We evaluated the relationship between DM2 and systolic function considering PET quantitative myocardial perfusion. We analyzed 585 patients without a previous myocardial infarction referred to a rest and adenosine stress Nitrogen-13 ammonia PET. A bootstrapped multiple linear regression analysis was performed using DM2, stress myocardial blood flow (sMBF), myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR), and clinical risk factors as predictors and LVEF as the outcome variable; an interaction term was additionally investigated. Two hundred and ninety male and 295 female patients (mean age 65.3 ± 9.9 and 67.4 ± 10 years, respectively) were included. 57.1% presented hypertension, 16% smoking, 37.6% hypercholesterolemia, 33.8% family history for CAD, and 15.2% DM2. The mean MPR was 2.13 ± 0.48 and 2.21 ± 0.60, mean sMBF was 2.01 ± 0.51 and 2.15 ± 0.54, and mean LVEF was 63% ± 10.4 and 67% ± 10.1 for diabetics and non-diabetics, respectively. A significant relation was detected for sMBF (B = 5.830 95% CI [3.505, 9.549], P = .001) and DM2 (B = -2.599 95% CI [-5.125, -0.119], P = .03) with LVEF. The interaction (DM2 × sMBF) yielded no significance (P = .512). DM2 influences PET-measured systolic function in patients without previous myocardial infarction independently from myocardial perfusion parameters. Our study supports the importance of DM2 as an independent risk factor for deteriorating systolic function. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2016.
All research outputs
#15,740,207
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#1,042
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,616
of 313,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#19
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,909 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.