Alpha 2.0
Login Register
» Articles » PMID: 37337782

Comparison of Regadenoson and Dipyridamole Safety Profiles During Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging

Overview
Journal Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther
Date 2023 Jun 20
PMID 37337782
Authors
Jan Roczniak
Justyna Baczalska
Gabriela Kanclerz
Weronika Zielinska
Joanna Ozga
Blazej Cymerman
Agnieszka Stepien
Magdalena Kostkiewicz
Katarzyna Holcman
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: The pharmacological stress test with vasodilator agents is an alternative cardiological diagnostic tool for patients with contraindications to the classical stress test provided by physical activity during single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). The study compared the frequency of the side effects of regadenoson and dipyridamole during a SPECT MPI.

Methods: This retrospective study included data of 283 consecutive patients who underwent pharmacological stress tests in years 2015-2020. The study group consisted of 240 patients who had received dipyridamole and 43 patients who had received regadenoson. The collected data included the patients' characteristics, the occurrence of side effects (divided into mild: headache, vertigo, nausea, vomiting, dyspnea, chest discomfort, hot flushes, general weakness and severe: bradycardia, hypotension, loss of consciousness), and blood pressure values/measurements.

Results: Overall, complications occurred relatively often (regadenoson: 23.2%, dipirydamol: 26.7%, p=0.639). Procedure discontinuation was necessary in 0.7% of examinations, whereas pharmacological support was necessary in 4.7%. There was no difference in the prevalence of mild (regadenoson: 16.2%, dipirydamol: 18.3%, p=0.747) and severe complications (regadenoson: 11.6%, dipyridamole: 15.0%, p=0.563). However, regadenoson has been found to cause a significantly smaller mean decrease of systolic blood pressure (SBP) (regadenoson: -2.6±10.0 mmHg, dipyridamole: -8.7±9.6 mmHg, p=0.002), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (regadenoson: -0.9±5.4 mmHg, dipyridamole: -3.6±6.2 mmHg, p=0.032), as well as mean arterial pressure (MAP) (regadenoson: -1.5±5.6 mmHg, dipyridamole: -5.4±6.5 mmHg, p=0.001).

Conclusion: Regadenoson and dipyridamole presented a similar safety profile during SPECT MPI. However, regadenoson has been found to cause significantly smaller decreases in SBP, DBP, and MAP.

References
1.
Friedman M, Spalding J, Kothari S, Wu Y, Gatt E, Boulanger L . Myocardial perfusion imaging laboratory efficiency with the use of regadenoson compared to adenosine and dipyridamole. J Med Econ. 2013; 16(4):449-60. DOI: 10.3111/13696998.2013.772057. View
2.
Henzlova M, Duvall W, Einstein A, Travin M, Verberne H . ASNC imaging guidelines for SPECT nuclear cardiology procedures: Stress, protocols, and tracers. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016; 23(3):606-39. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-015-0387-x. View
3.
Yang H, Faust E, Gao E, Sethi S, Kitt T, Kristy R . Evaluating the use of pharmacological stress agents during single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging tests after inadequate exercise stress test. J Nucl Cardiol. 2021; 29(4):1788-1795. PMC: 9345818. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-021-02546-5. View
4.
Malakar A, Choudhury D, Halder B, Paul P, Uddin A, Chakraborty S . A review on coronary artery disease, its risk factors, and therapeutics. J Cell Physiol. 2019; 234(10):16812-16823. DOI: 10.1002/jcp.28350. View
5.
Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, Capodanno D, Barbato E, Funck-Brentano C . 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2019; 41(3):407-477. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425. View