ArticleScientific reports2020
Stationary tissue background correction increases the precision of clinical evaluation of intra-cardiac shunts by cardiovascular magnetic resonance.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automatic failure mode evaluation using non-linear phase contrast correction to improve flow measurement accuracy in cardiovascular magnetic resonance phase contrast imaging.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2025Article
- Fetal growth restriction followed by very preterm birth is associated with smaller kidneys but preserved kidney function in adolescence.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of stationary tissue background phase correction for affecting precision in the measurement of Qp/Qs by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). We enrolled consecutive patients (n = 91) referred for CMR at 1.5T without suspicion of cardiac shunt, and patients (n = 10) with verified cardiac shunts in this retrospective study. All patients underwent phase contrast flow quantification in the ascending aorta and pulmonary trunk. Flow was quantified using two semi-automatic software platforms (SyngoVia VA30, Vendor 1; Segment 2.0R4534, Vendor 2). Measurements were performed both uncorrected and corrected for linear (Vendor 1 and Vendor 2) or quadratic (Vendor 2) background phase. The proportion of patients outside the normal range of Qp/Qs was compared using the McNemar's test. Compared to uncorrected measurements, there were fewer patients with a Qp/Qs outside the normal range following linear correction using Vendor 1 (10% vs 18%, p < 0.001), and Vendor 2 (10% vs 18%, p < 0.001), and following quadratic correction using Vendor 2 (7% vs 18%, p < 0.001). No patient with known shunt was reclassified as normal following stationary background correction. Therefore, we conclude that stationary tissue background correction reduces the number of patients with a Qp/Qs ratio outside the normal range in a consecutive clinical population, while simultaneously not reclassifying any patient with known cardiac shunts as having a normal Qp/Qs. Stationary tissue background correction may be used in clinical patients to increase diagnostic precision.
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.