ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2012
Multimodality imaging for assessment of myocardial viability: nuclear, echocardiography, MR, and CT.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging used for Evaluation of Adipose-Derived Stromal Cell Therapy in Patients with Chronic Ischemic Heart Disease.Cell transplantation · 2019Trial
- The Role of Cardiac Computed Tomography in Heart Failure.Current heart failure reports · 2022Review
- Myocardial infarction assessment by surface electrocardiography.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- Low-dose dobutamine stress myocardial contrast echocardiography for the evaluation of myocardial microcirculation and prediction of overall cardiac function recovery.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Coronary artery angiography and myocardial viability imaging: a 3.0-T contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance coronary artery angiography with Gd-BOPTA.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2014Article
- Twenty four hour imaging delay improves viability detection by Tl-201 myocardial perfusion scintigraphy.Revista brasileira de cirurgia cardiovascular : orgao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia CardiovascularArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The assessment of myocardial viability may be an important component of the evaluation of patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. The primary goal of viability assessment in such patients is to guide therapeutic decisions by determining which patients would most likely benefit from revascularization. In patients with chronic coronary artery disease, left ventricular dysfunction may be a consequence of prior myocardium infarction, which is an irreversible condition, or reversible ischemic states such as stunning and hibernation. Imaging techniques utilize several methods to assess myocardial viability: left ventricular function, morphology, perfusion, and metabolism. Each technique (echocardiography, nuclear imaging, magnetic resonance imaging, and x-ray computed tomography) has the ability to assess one or more of these parameters. This article describes how each of these imaging modalities can be used to assess myocardial viability, and reviews the relative strengths and limitations of each technique.
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.