Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32844347›Full record

ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2020

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance for the Differentiation of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy.

Matthew K Burrage, Vanessa M Ferreira

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current heart failure reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Matthew K BurrageUniversity of Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (OCMR), Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Level 0, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Vanessa M FerreiraUniversity of Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (OCMR), Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Level 0, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK. vanessa.ferreira@cardiov.ox.ac.uk.

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/19/65/34692
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewLeft ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is a common presentation encountered in clinical practice with a diverse range of potential aetiologies. Differentiation of pathological from physiological hypertrophy can be challenging but is crucial for further management and prognostication. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) with advanced myocardial tissue characterisation is a powerful tool that may help to differentiate these aetiologies in the assessment of LVH. RECENT

findingsThe use of CMR for detailed morphological assessment of LVH is well described. More recently, advanced CMR techniques (late gadolinium enhancement, parametric mapping, diffusion tensor imaging, and myocardial strain) have been used. These techniques are highly promising in helping to differentiate key aetiologies of LVH and provide valuable prognostic information. Recent advancements in CMR tissue characterisation, such as parametric mapping, in combination with detailed morphological assessment and late gadolinium enhancement, provide a powerful resource that may help assess and differentiate important causes of LVH.

Indexed as

Ventricular RemodelingDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansHypertrophy, Left VentricularMagnetic Resonance Imaging, CineMyocardiumCardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH)T1 mapping

Identifiers

PMID32844347
PMCPMC7495998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.