ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2014
Combined electrocardiography, coronary angiography and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of viral myocarditis: A case report.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C), a Post-viral Myocarditis and Systemic Vasculitis-A Critical Review of Its Pathogenesis and Treatment.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020Review
- Article
- Diagnostic Approach to Myocarditis Mimicking Myocardial Infarction at Initial Presentation.Cardiology research · 2016Article
- Myocarditis in athlete and myocardial bridge: An innocent bystander?World journal of cardiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endomyocardial biopsy is the gold standard for diagnosing viral myocarditis. However, this method is rarely used as it is more invasive, less sensitive and has a higher incidence of complications than other methods. With recent developments in myocarditis research, cardiovascular nuclear magnetic resonance imaging has been demonstrated to have a marked advantage over endomyocardial biopsy, specifically regarding the differential diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, as it is noninvasive, repeatable, highly sensitive and highly specific for diagnosing myocarditis. Myocardial edema is characteristic of myocardial inflammation, myocardial necrosis and myocardial fibrosis. T2-weighted nuclear magnetic resonance imaging sensitively detects myocardial tissue edema and additional imaging parameters contribute to the diagnosis of myocarditis. Therefore, combining these methods with the current sophisticated electrocardiogram and coronary angiography examination methods may facilitate the rapid and accurate assessment of viral myocarditis. A 44-year-old male patient with symptoms of dyspnea and shortness of breath accompanied by dizziness, through electrocardiography, coronary angiography and magnetic resonance imaging, was diagnosed viral myocarditis.
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.