ArticleMagnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine2019
Assessment of Coronary Flow Velocity Reserve in the Left Main Trunk Using Phase-contrast MR Imaging at 3T: Comparison with
Article in Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to verify coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) on the left main trunk (LMT) in comparison with myocardial flow reserve (MFR) by
methodsEighteen healthy adults and 13 patients with CAD were evaluated. CFVR in LMT was estimated by 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with phase contrast technique. MFR-PET in the LMT territory including anterior descending artery and circumflex artery was calculated as the ratio of myocardial blood flow (MBF)-PET at stress to MBF-PET at rest.
resultsThere was a significant positive relationship between CFVR and MFR-PET (R = 0.45, P < 0.0001). Inter-observer calculations of CFVR showed good correlation (R
conclusionCFVR by 3T was validated with MFR-PET. CFVR could detect the patients with CAD. This method is a simple and reliable index without radiation or contrast material.
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.