Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33255703›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020

The Role of Native T1 Mapping in the Diagnosis of Myocarditis in a Real-World Setting.

Johannes Kersten, Tobias Heck, Laura Tuchek, Wolfgang Rottbauer, Dominik Buckert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

5 authors.

Johannes KerstenDepartment of Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0165-9977
Tobias HeckDepartment of Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany.
Laura TuchekDepartment of Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany.
Wolfgang RottbauerDepartment of Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany.
Dominik BuckertDepartment of Internal Medicine II, University of Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis prospective single-center study sought to investigate the impact of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) on the diagnosis of myocarditis, with special attention given to absolute T1 values and defined cutoff values.

methodsAll patients referred to our center with the suspicion of an inflammatory myocardial disease were diagnosed by a consensus expert consortium blinded to CMR findings. Classical Lake Louise criteria were then used to confirm or change the diagnosis.

resultsOf a total of 149 patients, 15 were diagnosed with acute myocarditis without taking CMR findings into account. Acute myocarditis was excluded in 91 patients, whereas 42 cases were unclear. Using classical Lake Louise criteria, an additional 35 clear diagnoses were made, either confirming or excluding myocarditis. In the remaining patients, there was no further increase in definitive diagnoses using T1 measurements. The diagnostic performance of T1 mapping in distinguishing acute myocarditis patients from healthy controls was good (area under the curve (AUC) 0.835, cutoff value 1019 ms, sensitivity 73.7%, specificity 72.4%). In the group of patients with suspected and then excluded myocarditis, the cutoff value had a false-positive rate of 56.6%.

conclusionsAcute myocarditis should be diagnosed on the basis of clinical and imaging factors, whereas T1 mapping could be helpful, especially for excluding acute myocarditis.

Indexed as

acute myocarditiscardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)diagnostic performanceT1 mapping

Identifiers

PMID33255703
PMCPMC7760118

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.