ArticleBMC medical imaging2019
Evaluation of a shortened cardiac MRI protocol for left ventricular examinations: diagnostic performance of T1-mapping and myocardial function analysis.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of myocardial fibrosis and cardiac function in fibrotic lung diseases: a prospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cardiovascular Imaging, Climate Change, and Environmental Sustainability.Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging · 2024Review
- Value of a short non-contrast CMR protocol in MINOCA.European radiology · 2024Article
- The future of CMR: All-in-one vs. real-time CMR (Part 2).Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024Review
- The diagnostic accuracy of truncated cardiovascular MR protocols for detecting non-ischemic cardiomyopathies.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn this study we sought to retrospectively evaluate whether a very brief cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) protocol sufficiently distinguishes patients with relevant myocardial changes with need for further examination from healthy subjects.
methodsPatients with clinical indication for CMR (n = 160) were included in the study. Patients were categorized into two groups depending on presence of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. ROC-analysis was done for results of T1-, T2- mapping and extracellular volume evaluation in patients without LV dysfunction. Binary endpoint was correctly depicted pathology of the conventional qualitative CMR techniques and report.
resultsIn the patient cohort without LV dysfunction (49%), AUC for T1 mapping was 82% (p < 0.001), 60% for T2 mapping (p = 0.1) and 79% for ECV (p < 0.001). T1 mapping was significantly superior to T2 mapping to rule out left ventricular pathology (p = 0.012). Sensitivity for the combined use of T1 mapping and sBTFE cine imaging was 98%; the negative predictive value was 90%. In 49 patients (30%) full protocol CMR did not provide any additional information; T1 mapping correctly detected 57% of the subjects from this group who would not benefit from additional CMR.
conclusionA shortened CMR protocol comprising T1 mapping and LV-function analysis seems suitable to rule out myocardial alterations. Every third patient of the study population did not benefit from full contrast enhanced CMR. The shortened protocol correctly identified every fifth patient who would not benefit but no relevant pathologic findings with the obligation for treatment were missed.
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.