ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
The Role of Native T1 Mapping in the Diagnosis of Myocarditis in a Real-World Setting.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic performance of cardiovascular magnetic resonance parametric mapping as per modified Lake Louise Criteria in acute myocarditis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- Diagnosing acute myocarditis in the emergency department-advancing cardiac MRI with a focus on low-field MR applications.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Review
- CMR reveals myocardial damage from cardiotoxic oncologic therapies in breast cancer patients.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024Article
- Case Report: Myocarditis After COVID-19 Vaccination - Case Series and Literature Review.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Long COVID: Distinction between Organ Damage and Deconditioning.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.