ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2014
Detection of intracardiac masses in patients with coronary artery disease using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a comparison with transthoracic echocardiography.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cardiovascular MRI Compared to Echocardiography to Identify Cardioaortic Sources of Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Pooled it
- Transthoracic echocardiography vs. cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of left ventricular thrombus: an updated systematic review and diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026Review
- [MINOCA-myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
- Magnetic-Resonance-Imaging-Based Left Atrial Strain and Left Atrial Strain Rate as Diagnostic Parameters in Cardiac Amyloidosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in the Oncology Patient.JACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2018Review
- The Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in the Management of Patients with Cancer.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2018Review
- Multi-modality Imaging Assessment of Pericardial Masses.Current cardiology reports · 2017Review
- Cardiovascular imaging 2014 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2015Review
- Imaging of left heart intracardiac thrombus: clinical needs, current imaging, and emerging cardiac magnetic resonance techniques.Therapeutic advances in cardiovascular diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We sought to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging for the detection of intracardiac masses and thrombus formation in patients with history of coronary artery disease (CAD) in comparison to transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) under clinical routine conditions. 171 patients with history of CAD (89 male, aged 34-89 years, median 63 ± 11) underwent TTE and CMR during routine clinical examinations. TTE and CMR were independently analysed regarding the presence of intracardiac thrombus formation, masses and related size, dimensions, shape and signal characteristics. TTE depicted intracavitary thrombus formation in 40/171 patients (23.4 %) and intracardiac mass in 12/171 patients (7.0 %). All masses revealed in TTE were correctly detected on CMR and confirmed by histology. However, CMR showed 15 additional thrombi and 3 additional intracardiac masses (p = 0.001) that were not seen in TTE. Patients with poor systolic function (LVEF <30 %) had misleading results when referred to TTE (19 vs. 27 thrombi detected, p < 0.01). The detection of intracardiac masses or thrombi was not significantly different in patient with LVEF >30 %, whereas CMR was superior when the LVEF was <30 %. Routine TTE in patients with CAD leads to lower detection rates of intracardiac masses and thrombus formation in patients with severely impaired EF. Consequently we are missing a significant amount of clinically relevant diagnosis when only assessing patients with TTE. In patients with CAD and severely impaired LVEF, CMR should be considered as first line imaging tool to detect or rule out intracardiac masses and thrombi.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24384859What 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.