ArticleESC heart failure2020
Assessment of diastolic dysfunction: comparison of different cardiovascular magnetic resonance techniques.
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exercise-induced changes in left ventricular strain are affected by interleukin-6 activity: An exploratory analysis of a randomised-controlled trial in humans with abdominal obesity.Experimental physiology · 2024Trial
- Evaluating biventricular diastolic function using cardiovascular magnetic resonance 4d-flow derived E/e'.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026Article
- Quantitative myocardial hypoperfusion on coronary CTA: correlation with left atrial and left ventricular functional parameters.Polish journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Assessing diastolic function using CMR as an alternative to echocardiography: age- and gender-related normal reference values.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Article
- Adiposity influences on myocardial deformation: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature tracking study in people with overweight to obesity without established cardiovascular disease.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024Article
- A machine learning-derived risk score to predict left ventricular diastolic dysfunction from clinical cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Diastolic function in chronic kidney disease.Clinical kidney journal · 2023Review
- Compressed sensing cine imaging with higher temporal resolution for analysis of left atrial strain and strain rate by cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking.Japanese journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Lower ventricular and atrial strain in patients who recovered from COVID-19 assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance feature tracking.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Genetic and environmental determinants of diastolic heart function.Nature cardiovascular research · 2022Article
- Multi-modality cardiac imaging in the management of diabetic heart disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Diastolic Cardiac Function by MRI-Imaging Capabilities and Clinical Applications.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2021Review
- Assessment of diastolic dysfunction: comparison of different cardiovascular magnetic resonance techniques.ESC heart failure · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsHeart failure with preserved ejection fraction is still a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge, and accurate non-invasive diagnosis of left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (DD) remains difficult. The current study aimed at identifying the most informative cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) parameters for the assessment of LVDD. METHODS AND
resultsWe prospectively included 50 patients and classified them into three groups: with DD (DD+, n = 15), without (DD-, n = 26), and uncertain (DD±, n = 9). Diagnosis of DD was based on echocardiographic E/E', invasive LV end-diastolic pressure, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide. CMR was performed at 1.5 T to assess LV and left atrial (LA) morphology, LV diastolic strain rate (SR) by tissue tracking and tagging, myocardial peak velocities by tissue phase mapping, and transmitral inflow profile using phase contrast techniques. Statistics were performed only on definitive DD+ and DD- (total number 41). DD+ showed enlarged LA with LA end-diastolic volume/height performing best to identify DD+ with a cut-off value of ≥0.52 mL/cm (sensitivity = 0.71, specificity = 0.84, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.75). DD+ showed significantly reduced radial (inferolateral E peak: DD-: -14.5 ± 6.5%/s vs. DD+: -10.9 ± 5.9%/s, P = 0.04; anterolateral A peak: DD-: -4.2 ± 1.6%/s vs. DD+: -3.1 ± 1.4%/s, P = 0.04) and circumferential (inferolateral A peak: DD-: 3.8 ± 1.2%/s vs. DD+: 2.8 ± 0.8%/s, P = 0.007; anterolateral A peak: DD-: 3.5 ± 1.2%/s vs. DD+: 2.5 ± 0.8%/s, P = 0.048) SR in the basal lateral wall assessed by tissue tracking. In the same segments, DD+ showed lower peak myocardial velocity by tissue phase mapping (inferolateral radial peak: DD-: -3.6 ± 0.7 ms vs. DD+: -2.8 ± 1.0 ms, P = 0.017; anterolateral longitudinal peak: DD-: -5.0 ± 1.8 ms vs. DD+: -3.4 ± 1.4 ms, P = 0.006). Tagging revealed reduced global longitudinal SR in DD+ (DD-: 45.8 ± 12.0%/s vs. DD+: 34.8 ± 9.2%/s, P = 0.022). Global circumferential and radial SR by tissue tracking and tagging, LV morphology, and transmitral flow did not differ between DD+ and DD-.
conclusionsLeft atrial size and regional quantitative myocardial deformation applying CMR identified best patients with DD.
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.