ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2016
Magnetic resonance imaging in interventional therapy of patients with acute myocardial infarction prior to and after treatment.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2016. 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.
- Comparative analysis of late gadolinium enhancement assessment techniques for monitoring fibrotic changes in myocarditis follow-up.European radiology · 2024Article
- Risk Prediction Models for Ischemic Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Optimization of the method of measuring left ventricular end-diastolic diameter in cardiac magnetic resonance as a predictor of left ventricular enlargement.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Role of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Myocardial Infarction.Current cardiology reports · 2017Review
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
The aim of the study was to investigate the cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in interventional therapy of patients with acute myocardial infarction prior to and after treatment. Fifty-six cases of AMI patients with elective treatment by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were continuously selected. Patients with an incidence of 7-10 days were treated with CMR and echocardiography to evaluate the quality of myocardial infarction, visual score method (VSM), wall motion score abnormality, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Patients with an incidence of 10-14 days were treated with PCI, and CMR and echocardiography were evaluated after 6 months, after which the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were compared. The infarction quality, VSM score and wall motion abnormality (WMA) score were significantly reduced following surgery, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Ultrasound evaluation of LVEDD, LVESD, and LVEF prior to and after surgery was compared, and the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). Evaluation of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in LVEDD prior to surgery was increased compared with that of the ultrasound in LVEDD, whereas MRI in LVESD and LVEF was decreased compared to that of the ultrasound obtained for LVESD and LVEF. Additionally, postoperative LVEDD was reduced compared with preoperative LVEDD, whereas LVEF was increased, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). However, the evaluation of LVESD using the two methods exhibited no significant change. MACE occurred in 7 (12.5%) of 56 cases. The infarction quality of patients in the MACE group following surgery indicated that VSM and WMA scores were significantly higher than the group without MACE, while LVEF was lower than the MACE group following surgery, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05), albeit the ultrasound results of LVEF indicated no difference. In conclusion, CMR evaluation of AMI patients with elective PCI treatment in myocardial remodeling and cardiac function were more sensitive and accurate than with cardiac ultrasound.
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.