Gender-related differences in side-effects and hemodynamic response to regadenoson in patients undergoing SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging
- 14 Downloads
To evaluate differences in side-effects and hemodynamic response between men and women undergoing regadenoson-stress SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI).
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.
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.
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.
KeywordsRegadenoson Gender Heart rate response Side-effects
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in the present study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.2013 American Society of Nuclear Cardiology / MedAxiom Nuclear Survey. J Nucl Cardiol. 2014;21(Suppl 1):5–88. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-9862-z.
- 2.Iskandrian AE, Bateman TM, Belardinelli L, Blackburn B, Cerqueira MD, Hendel RC, et al. Adenosine versus regadenoson comparative evaluation in myocardial perfusion imaging: results of the ADVANCE phase 3 multicenter international trial. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:645–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2007.06.114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Mahmarian JJ, Peterson LE, Xu J, Cerqueira MD, Iskandrian AE, Bateman TM, et al. Regadenoson provides perfusion results comparable to adenosine in heterogeneous patient populations: a quantitative analysis from the ADVANCE MPI trials. J Nucl Cardiol. 2015;22:248–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-9981-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Cerqueira MD, Nguyen P, Staehr P, Underwood SR, Iskandrian AE. Effects of age, gender, obesity, and diabetes on the efficacy and safety of the selective A2A agonist regadenoson versus adenosine in myocardial perfusion imaging integrated ADVANCE-MPI trial results. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;1:307–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2008.02.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Iqbal FM, Hage FG, Ahmed A, Dean PJ, Raslan S, Heo J, et al. Comparison of the prognostic value of normal regadenoson with normal adenosine myocardial perfusion imaging with propensity score matching. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:1014–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.04.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Mahmarian JJ, Cerqueira MD, Iskandrian AE, Bateman TM, Thomas GS, Hendel RC, et al. Regadenoson induces comparable left ventricular perfusion defects as adenosine: a quantitative analysis from the ADVANCE MPI 2 trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:959–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.04.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Hussain N, Chaudhry W, Ahlberg AW, Amara RS, Elfar A, Parker MW, et al. An assessment of the safety, hemodynamic response, and diagnostic accuracy of commonly used vasodilator stressors in patients with severe aortic stenosis. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017;24:1200–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-016-0427-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Brinkert M, Reyes E, Walker S, Latus K, Maenhout A, Mizumoto R, et al. Regadenoson in Europe: first-year experience of regadenoson stress combined with submaximal exercise in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:511–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2619-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Verberne HJ, Acampa W, Anagnostopoulos C, Ballinger J, Bengel F, De Bondt P, et al. EANM procedural guidelines for radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging with SPECT and SPECT/CT: 2015 revision. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1929–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3139-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Salgado-Garcia C, Jimenez-Heffernan A, Lopez-Martin J, Molina-Mora M, Aroui T, Sanchez de Mora E, et al. Influence of body mass index and type of low-level exercise on the side effect profile of regadenoson. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:1906–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3717-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Farris GR, Hage FG, Kumar V, Iskandrian AE. Indirect evidence of sympathetic stimulation by regadenoson. J Nucl Cardiol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-018-1331-7.
- 20.Taqueti VR, Dorbala S, Wolinsky D, Abbott B, Heller GV, Bateman TM, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging in women for the evaluation of stable ischemic heart disease-state-of-the-evidence and clinical recommendations. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017;24:1402–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-017-0926-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Doukky R, Morales Demori R, Jain S, Kiriakos R, Mwansa V, Calvin JE. Attenuation of the side effect profile of regadenoson: a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled study with aminophylline in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging. “The ASSUAGE trial”. J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19:448–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-012-9533-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Thomas GS, Thompson RC, Miyamoto MI, Ip TK, Rice DL, Milikien D, et al. The RegEx trial: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled pilot study combining regadenoson, a selective A(2A) adenosine agonist, with low-level exercise, in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-008-9001-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Rangel MO, Demori RM, Doukky R. Age and gender as predictors of benefit from aminophylline administration in patients undergoing regadenoson stress myocardial perfusion imaging: a substudy of the ASSUAGE trial. Am J Ther. 2013;20:622–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mjt.0000434986.92593.8b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar