ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2013
Variability in quantitative cardiac magnetic resonance perfusion analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in a district hospital.Acta radiologica open · 2023Article
- Use of bio-informatics assessment schema (BIAS) to improve diagnosis and prognosis of myocardial perfusion data: results from the NHLBI-sponsored women's ischemia syndrome evaluation (WISE).Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2016Article
- Improved diagnosis and prognosis using Decisions Informed by Combining Entities (DICE): results from the NHLBI-sponsored Women's Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE).Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
By taking advantage of its high spatial resolution, noninvasive and nontoxic nature first-pass perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has rendered an indispensable tool for the noninvasive detection of reversible myocardial ischemia. A potential advantage of perfusion CMR is its ability to quantitatively assess perfusion reserve within a myocardial segment, as expressed semi- quantitatively by myocardial perfusion reserve index (MPRI) and fully- quantitatively by absolute myocardial blood flow (MBF). In contrast to the high accuracy and reliability of CMR in evaluating cardiac function and volumes, perfusion CMR is adversely affected by multiple potential reasons during data acquisition as well as post-processing. Various image acquisition techniques, various contrast agents and doses as well as variable blood flow at rest as well as variable reactions to stress all influence the acquired data. Mechanisms underlying the variability in perfusion CMR post processing, as well as their clinical significance, are yet to be fully elucidated. The development of a universal, reproducible, accurate and easily applicable tool in CMR perfusion analysis remains a challenge and will substantially enforce the role of perfusion CMR in improving clinical care.
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.