ArticleESC heart failure2020
Idiopathic giant cell myocarditis or cardiac sarcoidosis? A retrospective audit of a nationwide case series.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Redefining Cardiac Sarcoidosis with Advanced Imaging and Therapeutic Strategies.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2026Review
- Article
- Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and endomyocardial biopsy in giant cell myocarditis: a case report on diagnostic challenges and future perspectives.European heart journal. Case reports · 2025Article
- Endomyocardial biopsy in the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis.European journal of heart failure · 2025Article
- Fulminant Cardiac Sarcoidosis Successfully Treated With Aggressive Immunosuppressive Therapy.Case reports in cardiology · 2025Article
- Multimodality imaging in cardiac sarcoidosis: A case series of diverse phenotypes.Journal of clinical imaging science · 2025Article
- Cardiac Sarcoidosis-Diagnostic and Therapeutic Challenges.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Comprehensive Clinical Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Cardiac magnetic resonance in histologically proven eosinophilic myocarditis.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Article
- A case of giant cell myocarditis mimicking cardiac sarcoidosis successfully maintained by prednisolone and tacrolimus.Journal of cardiology cases · 2023Article
- Review
- Cardiac sarcoidosis: phenotypes, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis.European heart journal · 2023Article
- Cardiac magnetic resonance in giant cell myocarditis: a matched comparison with cardiac sarcoidosis.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2023Article
- Transcriptional and Immune Landscape of Cardiac Sarcoidosis.Circulation research · 2022Article
- Article
- Giant cell myocarditis following COVID-19 successfully treated by immunosuppressive therapy.Clinical case reports · 2022Article
- Diagnosis, management, and outcome of cardiac sarcoidosis and giant cell myocarditis: a Swedish single center experience.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Article
- Histology of Cardiac Sarcoidosis with Novel Considerations Arranged upon a Pathologic Basis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Cardiac Sarcoidosis and Giant Cell Myocarditis: Actually, 2 Ends of the Same Disease?Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
- Manifestations and Outcome of Cardiac Sarcoidosis and Idiopathic Giant Cell Myocarditis by 25-Year Nationwide Cohorts.Journal of the American Heart Association · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsCardiac sarcoidosis (CS) and giant cell myocarditis (GCM) are inflammatory cardiomyopathies sharing histopathological and clinical features. Their differentiation is difficult and susceptible of confusion and apparent mistakes. The possibility that they represent different phenotypes of a single disease has been debated. METHODS AND
resultsWe made a retrospective audit of 73 cases of GCM diagnosed in Finland since the late 1980s. All available histological material was reanalyzed as were other examinations pertinent to the distinction between GCM and CS. Finding granulomas in or outside the heart was considered diagnostic of CS and exclusive of GCM. Altogether 45 of the 73 cases of GCM (62%) were reclassified as CS. In all except one case, this was based on finding sarcoid granulomas that either had been originally missed (n = 29) or misinterpreted (n = 11) or were found in additional posttransplant myocardial specimens (n = 3) or samples of extracardiac tissue (n = 1) accrued over the disease course. Supporting the reclassification, patients relocated to the CS group had less heart failure at presentation (prevalence 20% vs. 46%, P = 0.017) and better 1 year transplant-free survival (82% vs. 45%, P = 0.011) than patients considered to represent true GCM.
conclusionsRecognizing granulomas in or outside the heart remains a challenge for the pathologist. Given that CS and GCM are considered distinct diseases and granulomas exclusive of GCM, many cases of GCM, if thoroughly scrutinized, may need reclassification as CS. However, whether CS and GCM are truly different entities or parts of a one-disease continuum has not yet been conclusively settled.
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.