ArticlePediatric radiology2016
Combined blood pool and extracellular contrast agents for pediatric and young adult cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Compact pediatric cardiac magnetic resonance imaging protocols.Pediatric radiology · 2023Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging of cardiovascular thrombi in children.Pediatric radiology · 2018Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA comprehensive cardiac magnetic resonance (cardiac MR) study including both late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and MR angiography may be indicated for patients with a history of acquired or congenital heart disease.
objectiveTo study the novel use of an extracellular agent for assessment of LGE combined with a blood pool contrast agent for detailed MR angiography evaluation to yield a comprehensive cardiac MR study in these patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe reviewed clinical cardiac MR studies utilizing extracellular and blood pool contrast agents and noted demographics, clinical data and adverse events. We rated LGE image quality and MR angiography image quality for each vascular segment and calculated inter-rater variability. We also quantified contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR).
resultsThirty-three patients (mean age 13.9 ± 3 years) received an extracellular contrast agent (10 gadobenate dimeglumine, 23 gadopentetate dimeglumine) and blood pool contrast agent (33 gadofosveset trisodium). No adverse events were reported. MRI indications included Kawasaki disease (8), cardiomyopathy and coronary anatomy (15), repaired congenital heart disease (8), and other (2). Mean LGE quality was 2.6 ± 0.6 with 97% diagnostic imaging. LGE quality did not vary by type of contrast agent given (P = 0.07). Mean MR angiography quality score was 4.7 ± 0.6, with high inter-rater agreement (k = 0.6-0.8, P < 0.002). MR angiography quality did not vary by type of contrast agent used (P = 0.6).
conclusionCardiac MR studies utilizing both extracellular and blood pool contrast agents are feasible and safe and provide excellent-quality LGE and MR angiography images. The use of two contrast agents allows for a comprehensive assessment of both myocardial viability and vascular anatomy during the same exam.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27576457What 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.