ArticleWorld journal of cardiology2018
Accuracy of myocardial viability imaging by cardiac MRI and PET depending on left ventricular function.
Article in World journal of cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Cardiac MR with PET CT in Evaluation of Myocardial Viability: Single-Center Experience.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2026Article
- Hybrid PET/CT and PET/MR in Coronary Artery Disease: An Update for Clinicians, with Insights into AI-Guided Integration.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Increased [Basic research in cardiology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Clinical Variables Affecting Myocardial Glucose Uptake in Cardiac FDG PET.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- MRI Application and Challenges of Hyperpolarized Carbon-13 Pyruvate in Translational and Clinical Cardiovascular Studies: A Literature Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- New Horizons in HyperpolarizedMolecular imaging and biology · 2024Article
- The impact of viability assessment using cardiac MRI and echocardiogram on the outcome of revascularization in patients with multi-vessels coronary artery disease and moderate to severe ischemic cardiomyopathy.Saudi medical journal · 2023Article
- Comparative Analysis of Myocardial Viability Multimodality Imaging in Patients with Previous Myocardial Infarction and Symptomatic Heart Failure.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- How viable is SPECT for viability assessment in the PET era?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- Article
- Longitudinal changes in extent of late gadolinium enhancement in repaired Tetralogy of Fallot: a retrospective analysis of serial CMRs.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2021Article
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare myocardial viability assessment accuracy of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) compared to [
methodsOne-hundred-five patients with known obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and anticipated coronary revascularization were included in the study and examined by CMR on a 1.5T scanner. The CMR protocol consisted of cine-sequences for function analysis and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging for viability assessment in 8 mm long and contiguous short axis slices. All patients underwent PET using [
resultsCMR and PET data of all 105 patients were sufficient for evaluation and 5508 segments were compared in total. In all patients, CMR detected significantly more scars (score 2-4) than PET: 45%
conclusionCMR and PET reveal different diagnostic accuracy in myocardial viability assessment depending on LV function state. CMR, in general, is less optimistic in functional recovery prediction.
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.