ArticleEuropean journal of hybrid imaging2019
Simultaneous
Article in European journal of hybrid imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance expert consensus statement on quantitative myocardial perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic ResonanceGuideline
- SimultaneousFrontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- High-resolution free-breathing automated quantitative myocardial perfusion by cardiovascular magnetic resonance for the detection of functionally significant coronary artery disease.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2024Article
- Left ventricular function and volumes from gated [Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Assessment of a digital and an analog PET/CT system for accurate myocardial perfusion imaging with a flow phantom.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022Article
- Assessment of left and right ventricular functional parameters using dynamic dual-tracer [Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022Article
- First-pass cardiac PET: Potentiality and limitations.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022Article
- Pixel-wise assessment of cardiovascular magnetic resonance first-pass perfusion using a cardiac phantom mimicking transmural myocardial perfusion gradients.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) is the non-invasive reference standard for myocardial blood flow (MBF) quantification. Hybrid PET-MR allows simultaneous PET and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) acquisition under identical experimental and physiological conditions. This study aimed to determine feasibility of simultaneous
methodsImages were acquired using a 3T hybrid PET-MR scanner. Phantom study: MBF was simulated at different physiological perfusion rates and a protocol for simultaneous PET-MR perfusion imaging was developed. Volunteer study: five healthy volunteers underwent adenosine stress.
resultsPhantom study: PET and CMR MBF measurements demonstrated high repeatability with intraclass coefficients 0.98 and 0.99, respectively. There was high correlation between PET and CMR MBF (
conclusionSimultaneous MBF quantification using hybrid PET-MR imaging is feasible with high test repeatability and good to moderate agreement between PET and CMR. Future studies in coronary artery disease patients may allow cross-validation of techniques.
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.