ArticleDer Radiologe2010
[Myocardial MR tagging: analysis of regional and global myocardial function].
Article in Der Radiologe, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Cardiac magnetic resonance tomography in the diagnostics of restrictive and unclassified cardiopathies].Der Radiologe · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myocardial MR tagging is a powerful method which allows for assessment of myocardial function and may become an important tool for clinical evaluation of cardiac dysfunction, particularly in ischemic heart disease. In addition to visual assessment it allows direct quantification of myocardial deformation and strain to measure contractility. The use of myocardial tagging has provided new insights into the (patho)physiology of regional wall motion, and several parameters have been described as being useful to identify an ischemic response of the myocardium. One challenge encountered with tagging at 1.5 T is the fading of tags at end-diastole, greatly limiting the evaluation of myocardial function during diastole. Due to longer T(1) relaxation times of the myocardium, tagging at 3 T has shown to have a higher CNR(Tag) and better tag persistence when compared to current clinical gradient-echo tagging protocols at 1.5 T. As a consequence, tagging at higher field strengths may be well suited for the characterization of the diastolic portion of the cardiac cycle in future applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.