ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2012
Function of remote non-infarcted myocardium after STEMI: analysis with cardiovascular magnetic resonance.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic significance of non-infarcted myocardium correlated with microvascular impairment evaluated dynamically by native T1 mapping.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Longitudinal strain in remote non-infarcted myocardium by tissue tracking CMR: characterization, dynamics, structural and prognostic implications.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate remote myocardial function after ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and the impact of infarct size (IS) using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). 161 patients and 15 controls underwent CMR at 1st week and 6th month after STEMI. Using the 17-segments model, segments were categorized into infarcted, adjacent and remote myocardium. Relative systolic wall thickening (SWT, %) was assessed using the centerline method. IS (% of left ventricular mass) was determined in late enhancement imaging. Overall, in remote myocardium, SWT was comparable (83 ± 32) to controls (77 ± 25, P = .5) and did not increase significantly (P = .2) at the 6th month (88 ± 35, P = .3 vs. control). When IS was categorized into tertiles (<13.6%, (n = 49), 13.7-28.2%, (n = 60), >28.2%, (n = 52)), SWT in the remote area at the 1st week was not different from controls, regardless of infarct size (p between .2 and .8 for all tertiles). At 6 months, SWT was larger compared to controls only in small infarctions (98 ± 34 vs. 77 ± 25, P = .03). In medium and large infarctions there was no difference in SWT of the remote area compared to controls (87 ± 33 and 79 ± 34, P = .3 and P = .09) and there was no significant increase at 6 months (P between .2 and .9). In remote myocardium there was no difference in contractility compared to controls after STEMI. After 6 month a slight hypercontractility can only be observed in small infarctions. In medium and large infarctions no difference of SWT in remote myocardium compared to controls can be observed.
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.