Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29713779›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2018

Extracardiac findings at cardiac MR imaging: a single-centre retrospective study over 14 years.

Felix C Sokolowski, Philipp Karius, Alejandra Rodríguez, Alexander Lembcke, Moritz Wagner, Bernd Hamm, Marc Dewey

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Incidental Non-cardiac Findings in Cardiovascular Imaging.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2018
    Review
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

7 authors.

Felix C SokolowskiDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Philipp KariusDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Alejandra RodríguezDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Alexander LembckeDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Moritz WagnerDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Bernd HammDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Marc DeweyDepartment of Radiology, Charite Medical School, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universitat Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. marc.dewey@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4402-2733

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the prevalence and significance of extracardiac findings (ECF) in a large set of cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) imaging examinations.

methodsThe institutional review board (IRB) of the Charité approved this retrospective, single-centre study. A total of 4376 cardiac MR imaging reports of 3553 patients (age 37.4 ± 20 years, 60.8 % male) examined from 2000 to 2014 were included. Findings with a recommendation for follow-up were considered "major ECF". To analyse the association of indication, age and gender with ECF, Poisson regression and computed incidence rate ratios (IRR) were evaluated.

resultsThe overall prevalence of ECF was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI] 32.5-35.6%). Major ECF were present in 3.4% (95% CI 2.9-4.1%) while findings that changed patient management were found in 0.9% (95% CI 0.7-1.3%). In the cases of congenital heart disease, ECF prevalence was higher compared to myocarditis (IRR, 6.0; 95% CI 5.1-7.1%; p < 0.001), while the prevalence of major ECF was lower (IRR, 0.2; 95% CI 0.02-0.51%; p < 0.05). Older patient age was associated with more nonvascular ECF (p < 0.001). Female patients had the same probability of having an ECF as male patients (IRR, 1.04; 95% CI 0.95-1.1%; p = 0.43).

conclusionECF in cardiac MR imaging are present in about every third patient while relevant ECF that change patient management can be found in about one out of 100 patients. Our data suggest that it is important to involve well-trained radiologists in reading cardiac MR images, which often reveal ECF if congenital heart disease is the clinical indication. KEY POINTS: • Extracardiac findings are present in about every third patient. • Relevant ECF changing patient management are found in one out of 100 findings. • Chance of ECF is high in patients with CHD and vascular indications.

Indexed as

Incidental FindingsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHeart DiseasesHumansInfantMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedMyocarditisPrevalenceCardiac imaging techniqueChestExtracardiac abnormalitiesIncidental findingsMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.