Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23430328›Full record

ReviewMedical & biological engineering & computing2013

Understanding the mechanisms amenable to CRT response: from pre-operative multimodal image data to patient-specific computational models.

C Tobon-Gomez, N Duchateau, R Sebastian, S Marchesseau, O Camara, E Donal, M De Craene, A Pashaei, J Relan, M Steghofer and 12 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Computational Modeling for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2018
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

C Tobon-GomezCISTIB, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain, catactg@gmail.com.
N Duchateau
R Sebastian
S Marchesseau
O Camara
E Donal
M De Craene
A Pashaei
J Relan
M Steghofer
P Lamata
H Delingette
S Duckett
M Garreau
A Hernandez
K S Rhode
M Sermesant
N Ayache
C Leclercq
R Razavi
N P Smith
A F Frangi

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/J006742/1Wellcome Trust 099973
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This manuscript describes our recent developments towards better understanding of the mechanisms amenable to cardiac resynchronization therapy response. We report the results from a full multimodal dataset corresponding to eight patients from the euHeart project. The datasets include echocardiography, MRI and electrophysiological studies. We investigate two aspects. The first one focuses on pre-operative multimodal image data. From 2D echocardiography and 3D tagged MRI images, we compute atlas based dyssynchrony indices. We complement these indices with presence and extent of scar tissue and correlate them with CRT response. The second one focuses on computational models. We use pre-operative imaging to generate a patient-specific computational model. We show results of a fully automatic personalized electromechanical simulation. By case-per-case discussion of the results, we highlight the potential and key issues of this multimodal pipeline for the understanding of the mechanisms of CRT response and a better patient selection.

Indexed as

Cardiac Resynchronization TherapyElectrocardiographyImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingModels, CardiovascularPrecision MedicineAdultAgedComputer SimulationHumansMiddle AgedPatient Selection

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.