ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2018
Optimizing right ventricular focused four-chamber views using three-dimensional imaging, a comparative magnetic resonance based study.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tricuspid valve: Once disregarded, now acknowledged.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2022Review
- Echocardiographic evaluations of right ventriculo-arterial coupling in experimental and clinical pulmonary hypertension.Physiological reports · 2019Article
- Right ventricular ejection fraction as predictor of outcome in acute heart failure using RV ellipsoid model: A retrospective analysis of a prospective cross-sectional study.JRSM cardiovascular diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Obtaining focused right ventricular (RV) apical view remains challenging using conventional two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography. This study main objective was to determine whether measurements from RV focused views derived from three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography (3D-RV-focused) are closely related to measurements from magnetic resonance (CMR). A first cohort of 47 patients underwent 3D echocardiography and CMR imaging within 2 h of each other. A second cohort of 25 patients had repeat 3D echocardiography to determine the test-retest characteristics; and evaluate the bias associated with unfocused RV views. Tomographic views were extracted from the 3D dataset: RV focused views were obtained using the maximal RV diameter in the transverse plane, and unfocused views from a smaller transverse diameter enabling visualization of the tricuspid valve opening. Measures derived using the 3D-RV-focused view were strongly associated with CMR measurements. Among functional metrics, the strongest association was between RV fractional area change (RVFAC) and ejection fraction (RVEF) (r = 0.92) while tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion moderately correlated with RVEF (r = 0.47), all p < 0.001. Among RV size measures, the strongest association was found between RV end-systolic area (RVESA) and volume (r = 0.87, p < 0.001). RV unfocused views led on average to 10% underestimation of RVESA. The 3D-RV-focused method had acceptable test-retest characteristics with a coefficient of variation of 10% for RVESA and 11% for RVFAC. Deriving standardized RV focused views using 3D echocardiography strongly relates to CMR-derived measures and may improve reproducibility in RV 2D measurements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29654480What 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.