Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26800662›Full record

ReviewJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2016

Role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology.

Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Jeanette Schulz-Menger

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 75 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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.

NCT05346094 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Multicenter Investigation of Cardiac Normal Values of Morphology, Function and Tissue Characteristics by Magnetic Resonance Imaging

TypeobservationalSponsorChinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Fuwai HospitalRan2022 to 2027Enrolled938ConditionsHealthy Participants, Reference ValuesArmsNo intervention
NCT07270367 phase3not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Finerenone and Cardiac Remodeling: A Randomized, Double- Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate The Effects of Finerenone on Ventricular Remodeling

TypeinterventionalSponsorSubodh VermaRan2025 to 2030Enrolled156ConditionsHeart FailureArmsFinerenone, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

75 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. SCMR Position Paper (2020) on clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2020
    Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Representation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the AHA / ACC guidelines.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2017
    Guideline
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Motion correction and super-resolution for multi-slice cardiac magnetic resonance imaging via an end-to-end deep learning approach.Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cardiac MRI at Low Field Strengths.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. The Nottingham Ischaemic Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance resource (NotIs CMR): a prospective paired clinical and imaging scar database-protocol.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023
    Article
  20. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology: a comprehensive summary and update.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023
    Review

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Florian von Knobelsdorff-BrenkenhoffWorking Group Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a joint cooperation between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine; and HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch, Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, Berlin, Germany. florian.von-knobelsdorff@charite.de.
Jeanette Schulz-MengerWorking Group Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a joint cooperation between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine; and HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch, Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, Berlin, Germany. jeanette.schulz-menger@charite.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite common enthusiasm for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), its application in Europe is quite diverse. Restrictions are attributed to a number of factors, like limited access, deficits in training, and incomplete reimbursement. Aim of this study is to perform a systematic summary of the representation of CMR in the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

methodsTwenty-nine ESC guidelines were screened for the terms "magnetic", "MRI", "CMR", "MR" and "imaging". As 3 topics were published twice (endocarditis, pulmonary hypertension, NSTEMI), 26 guidelines were finally included. MRI in the context of non-cardiovascular examinations was not recognized. The main CMR-related conclusions and, if available, the level of evidence and the class of recommendation were extracted.

resultsFourteen of the 26 guidelines (53.8%) contain specific recommendations regarding the use of CMR. Nine guidelines (34.6%) mention CMR in the text, and 3 (11.5%) do not mention CMR. The 14 guidelines with recommendations regarding the use of CMR contain 39 class-I recommendations, 12 class-IIa recommendations, 10 class-IIb recommendations and 2 class-III recommendations. Most of the recommendations have evidence level C (41/63; 65.1%), followed by level B (16/63; 25.4%) and level A (6/63; 9.5%). The four guidelines, which absolutely contained most recommendations for CMR, were stable coronary artery disease (n = 14), aortic diseases (n = 9), HCM (n = 7) and myocardial revascularization (n = 7).

conclusionsCMR is represented in the majority of the ESC guidelines. They contain many recommendations in favour of the use of CMR in specific scenarios. Issues regarding access, training and reimbursement have to be solved to offer CMR to patients in accordance with the ESC guidelines.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesConsensusEuropeEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPractice Guidelines as TopicPredictive Value of TestsSocieties, Medical

Identifiers

PMID26800662
PMCPMC4724113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.