ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2017
Multimodality Imaging of Pericardial Diseases.
Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guideline of the Brazilian Society of Cardiology and the Brazilian College of Radiology - 2024.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
- Hemopericardium in the acute clinical setting: Are we ready for a tailored management approach on the basis of MDCT findings?La Radiologia medica · 2021Review
- The role of cardiac imaging in the management of non-ischemic cardiovascular diseases in human immunodeficiency virus infection.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020Article
- Multimodality Imaging for the Assessment of Pericardial Diseases.Current cardiology reports · 2019Review
- Hemorrhagic Pericardial Cyst Complicated with Constrictive Pericarditis.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
opinion statementPericardial diseases have changed their epidemiology in the past few years. With the aging population and decreasing incidence of communicable diseases, the causes of pericardial diseases have significantly changed from infectious and malignant to postradiation and cardiac surgery causes. Despite that, pericardial diseases remain difficult to diagnose. The accurate and timely diagnosis of these diseases is essential to avoid the late sequela of pericardial constriction and pericardial cirrhosis. Echocardiography remains the first test of choice for the assessment of patients with suspected pericardial diseases. Most patients with acute pericarditis have a self-limiting course and do not need further imaging. However, in the era of multimodality imaging, other modalities, namely, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), are often utilized in complex cases. These two modalities provide a wide-open view of the pericardium and adjacent structures. They have high resolution to assess pericardial calcification, a hallmark of many diseases especially tuberculous constrictive pericarditis. CMR is also unique in its ability to assess pericardial late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and edema. These have been recently suggested to be very important in the progression from acute pericarditis to constrictive pericarditis. In addition, they provide prognostic value to assess which patients are at high risk of developing heart failure and resource utilization. Thus, in the current era, patients with suspected complex pericardial diseases will need a multimodality approach rather than a single modality approach.
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.