Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reduced Coronary Vasodilator Function in Infarcted and Normal Myocardium after Myocardial Infarction

Open access
Uren, Neal G., Crake, Tom, Lefroy, David C., de Silva, Ranil, Davies, Graham J., Maseri, Attilio·1994·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ability of the coronary vascular bed to dilate and thus increase blood flow to the myocardium may be impaired in coronary artery disease, even in regions of myocardium supplied by an angiographically normal coronary artery. If this kind of vasomotor dysfunction was present or accentuated after acute myocardial infarction, it might influence the extent of ischemia and necrosis in areas not directly injured by the infarction. METHODS: We studied 13 patients (mean [+/- SD] age, 62 +/- 11 years) with single-vessel coronary artery disease after they had received thrombolytic therapy for myocardial infarction. Using positron-emission tomography (PET) with oxygen-15-labeled water, we measured regional myocardial blood flow under basal conditions and after the intravenous administration of dipyridamole (0.5 mg per kg of body weight over a period of four minutes) 8 +/- 3 days after infarction in all 13 patients (1-week study) and 6 +/- 2 months after infarction in 9 of the 13 (6-month study). On both occasions we measured blood flow both in the infarcted region and in a region of myocardium that was remote from the infarcted region and supplied by a normal artery. RESULTS: At the one-week PET study, the coronary vasodilator response (the ratio of the myocardial blood flow after the administration of dipyridamole to basal blood flow) was 1.12 +/- 0.50 in the infarct-related artery and 1.53 +/- 0.36 in the remote region (P = 0.015). At the six-month study, the coronary vasodilator response was 1.42 +/- 0.37 in the infarcted region and 2.19 +/- 0.69 in the remote region (P = 0.004 for the comparison with the infarcted region; P = 0.011 for the comparison with the remote region at the one-week study). The value in remote myocardium remained lower than that in similar regions in 10 control patients, who had single-vessel coronary artery disease but no evidence of myocardial infarction (3.17 +/- 0.72; P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: After acute myocardial infarction, there is a severe vasodilator abnormality involving not only resistance vessels in infarcted myocardium, but also those in myocardium perfused by normal coronary vessels. This dysfunction may affect the extent of myocardial ischemia and necrosis after coronary occlusion.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199407283310402

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Cited by

See all 391

Metadata

Authors
Uren, N. G., Crake, T., Lefroy, D. C., de Silva, R., Davies, G. J., & Maseri, A.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1994-07-28
Volume
331
Issue
4
Pages
222-227
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2336211246
Cited by
391
References
25
FWCI
13.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reduced Coronary Vasodilator Function in Infarcted and Normal Myocardium after Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199407283310402
The paper
Uren, N. G., Crake, T., Lefroy, D. C., de Silva, R., Davies, G. J., & Maseri, A. (1994). Reduced Coronary Vasodilator Function in Infarcted and Normal Myocardium after Myocardial Infarction. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199407283310402

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.