Trial reportJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2015
Individual component analysis of the multi-parametric cardiovascular magnetic resonance protocol in the CE-MARC trial.
Trial report in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accelerated stress CMR for the detection of significant coronary artery disease: a prospective randomized diagnostic accuracy study.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2026Trial
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Exercise Stress Testing, Stress Echocardiography, Myocardial Scintigraphy, and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of 104 Studies Published from 1990 to 2025.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Athletic Individuals-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Standard breath-hold versus free-breathing real-time cine cardiac MRI-a prospective randomized comparison in patients with known or suspected cardiac disease.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2025Article
- Comparison of Stress-Rest and Stress-LGE Analysis Strategy in Patients Undergoing Stress Perfusion Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging · 2023Article
- Intra-coronary physiology in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention and anginal therapy with a focus on microvascular disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Myocardial perfusion reserve quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is associated with late gadolinium enhancement in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.Heart and vessels · 2018Article
- Additive value of 3T cardiovascular magnetic resonance coronary angiography for detecting coronary artery disease.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2018Article
- Review of Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) 2015-2016 and transition of the JCMR office to Boston.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2017Review
- Assessment of stable coronary artery disease by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: Current and emerging techniques.World journal of cardiology · 2017Review
- Review of Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 2015.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2016Review
- Cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus coronary computed tomography angiography with fractional flow reserve for diagnosing obstructive coronary artery disease in higher risk patients: rationale and design of CONCORD-A prospective, single-center diagnostic accuracy study.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic ResonanceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe CE-MARC study assessed the diagnostic performance investigated the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). The study used a multi-parametric CMR protocol assessing 4 components: i) left ventricular function; ii) myocardial perfusion; iii) viability (late gadolinium enhancement (LGE)) and iv) coronary magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). In this pre-specified CE-MARC sub-study we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the individual CMR components and their combinations.
methodsAll patients from the CE-MARC population (n = 752) were included using data from the original blinded-read. The four individual core components of the CMR protocol was determined separately and then in paired and triplet combinations. Results were then compared to the full multi-parametric protocol.
resultsCMR and X-ray angiography results were available in 676 patients. The maximum sensitivity for the detection of significant CAD by CMR was achieved when all four components were used (86.5%). Specificity of perfusion (91.8%), function (93.7%) and LGE (95.8%) on its own was significantly better than specificity of the multi-parametric protocol (83.4%) (all P < 0.0001) but with the penalty of decreased sensitivity (86.5% vs. 76.9%, 47.4% and 40.8% respectively). The full multi-parametric protocol was the optimum to rule-out significant CAD (Likelihood Ratio negative (LR-) 0.16) and the LGE component alone was the best to rue-in CAD (LR+ 9.81). Overall diagnostic accuracy was similar with the full multi-parametric protocol (85.9%) compared to paired and triplet combinations. The use of coronary MRA within the full multi-parametric protocol had no additional diagnostic benefit compared to the perfusion/function/LGE combination (overall accuracy 84.6% vs. 84.2% (P = 0.5316); LR- 0.16 vs. 0.21; LR+ 5.21 vs. 5.77).
conclusionsFrom this pre-specified sub-analysis of the CE-MARC study, the full multi-parametric protocol had the highest sensitivity and was the optimal approach to rule-out significant CAD. The LGE component alone was the optimal rule-in strategy. Finally the inclusion of coronary MRA provided no additional benefit when compared to the combination of perfusion/function/LGE.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN77246133.
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.