Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,768 studies31 sourcesUpdated 13 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC-ND 4.0JACC Case Reports

PET Versus Invasive Provocation Testing Accuracy for Coronary Microvascular Disease

  • Kelton F. Reynolds1
  • Jay Ramsay2
  • Jimmy L. Kerrigan3
  • Sasan R. Raissi4
4 affiliations
  1. 1Internal Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center Nashville, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  2. 2Cardiology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center Nashville, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  3. 3Interventional Cardiology, Ascension St Thomas Heart, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  4. 4Advanced Cardiovascular Imaging, Ascension St Thomas Heart, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Background: Despite substantial evidence supporting the accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET) for detecting epicardial disease, there are limited data regarding the accuracy of PET for cardiac microvascular disease (CMD).

Project Rationale: Defining the accuracy of PET for CMD detection could establish PET as a single noninvasive modality for evaluating both epicardial and microvascular coronary function, with less risk and cost when compared with invasive assessment.

Project Summary: This is a single-center, retrospective, diagnostic accuracy study to assess the accuracy of PET for diagnosing microvascular disease using invasive coronary angiography, with comprehensive coronary function testing as the gold standard.

Take-Home Messages: In this small cohort (N = 15), PET demonstrated poor diagnostic accuracy for CMD detection compared to invasive coronary angiography with invasive provocation testing. The high prevalence of epicardial vasospasm (47%) suggests this entity may be underdiagnosed in patients with recurrent angina and nonobstructive coronary disease.

Related

  1. Acetylcholine Provocation Testing for Coronary Vasomotor Disorders
    Andrea Caffè, Francesco M. Animati, Rocco A. Montone
    Reviews in cardiovascular medicinePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textCardiovascular medicineEurope PMC
  2. Comparable Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes between Patients with Total and Subtotal Coronary Occlusion during Intracoronary Acetylcholine Provocation Testing
    Kota Usami, Yuichi Saito, Shunsuke Nakamura +4
    Internal MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaJ-STAGE
  3. Non-Invasive Assessment of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction: From Flow Quantification to Clinical Decision Making
    Panagiotis Theofilis, Athanasios Sakalidis, Kyriakos Dimitriadis +11
    Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)Peer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. Time-Dependent Analysis of Blood Sampling to Detect Metabolic Ischemia ― Serial Coronary Artery–Coronary Sinus Lactate Analysis During Acetylcholine Provocation ―
    Tsuyoshi Ito, Masashi Yokoi, Shuichi Kitada +6
    Circulation JournalPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textMedical imaging & radiologyJ-STAGE
  5. Anxiety Before and After Drug Provocation Testing in Drug Hypersensitivity: Who Remains Anxious Despite a Reassuring Test?
    Ragıp Fatih Kural, Ceyda Tunakan Dalgıç, Sinem İnan +6
    Journal of Asthma and AllergyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textPharmacology & toxicologyPMCEurope PMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{reynolds2026versus,
  title = {{PET Versus Invasive Provocation Testing Accuracy for Coronary Microvascular Disease}},
  author = {Kelton F. Reynolds and Jay Ramsay and Jimmy L. Kerrigan and Sasan R. Raissi},
  journal = {JACC Case Reports},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.1016/j.jaccas.2026.110214},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccas.2026.110214},
  note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - PET Versus Invasive Provocation Testing Accuracy for Coronary Microvascular Disease
AU  - Kelton F. Reynolds
AU  - Jay Ramsay
AU  - Jimmy L. Kerrigan
AU  - Sasan R. Raissi
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/16
JO  - JACC Case Reports
DO  - 10.1016/j.jaccas.2026.110214
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccas.2026.110214
AB  - Background: Despite substantial evidence supporting the accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET) for detecting epicardial disease, there are limited data regarding the accuracy of PET for cardiac microvascular disease (CMD).  Project Rationale: Defining the accuracy of PET for CMD detection could establish PET as a single noninvasive modality for evaluating both epicardial and microvascular coronary function, with less risk and cost when compared with invasive assessment.  Project Summary: This is a single-center, retrospective, diagnostic accuracy study to assess the accuracy of PET for diagnosing microvascular disease using invasive coronary angiography, with comprehensive coronary function testing as the gold standard.  Take-Home Messages: In this small cohort (N = 15), PET demonstrated poor diagnostic accuracy for CMD detection compared to invasive coronary angiography with invasive provocation testing. The high prevalence of epicardial vasospasm (47%) suggests this entity may be underdiagnosed in patients with recurrent angina and nonobstructive coronary disease.
SN  - 2666-0849
ER  -