Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31032264›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2019

Cardio-Immunology of Myocarditis: Focus on Immune Mechanisms and Treatment Options.

Bernhard Maisch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing 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

59 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Post-viral myocarditis.Heart failure reviews · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Viral Myocarditis.The Yale journal of biology and medicine · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

1 author.

Bernhard MaischFaculty of Medicine, and Heart and Vessel Center, Philipps-University, Marburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Myocarditis and inflammatory cardiomyopathy are syndromes, not aetiological disease entities. From animal models of cardiac inflammation we have detailed insight of the strain specific immune reactions based on the genetic background of the animal and the infectiosity of the virus. Innate and adaptive immunity also react in man. An aetiological diagnosis of a viral vs. a non-viral cause is possible by endomyocardial biopsy with histology, immunohistology and PCR for microbial agents. This review deals with the different etiologies of myocarditis and inflammatory cardiomyopathy on the basis of the genetic background and the predisposition for inflammation. It analyses the epidemiologic shift in cardiotropic viral agents in the last 30 years. Based on the understanding of the interaction between infection and the players of the innate and adaptive immune system it summarizes pathogenetic phases and clinical faces of myocarditis. It gives an up-to-date information on specific treatment options beyond symptomatic heart failure and antiarrhythmic therapy. Although inflammation can resolve spontaneously, specific treatment directed to the causative etiology is often required. For fulminant, acute, and chronic autoreactive myocarditis without viral persistence immunosuppressive treatment can be life-saving, for viral inflammatory cardiomyopathy ivIg treatment can resolve inflammation and often eradicate the virus.

Indexed as

endomyocardial biopsyimmunohistologyimmunopathogenesisimmunosuppressive therapyivIgmyocarditisPCR of cardiotropic viruses

Identifiers

PMID31032264
PMCPMC6473396

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.