ArticleJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2021
Fick versus flow: a real-time invasive cardiovascular magnetic resonance (iCMR) reproducibility study.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2021. 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.
- The Importance of Hepatic Surveillance After Single-Ventricle Palliation: An Interventional Study Validating Liver Elastography.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based prospective slice tracking for continuous catheter visualization during MRI-guided cardiac catheterization.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Emerging multimodality imaging techniques for the pulmonary circulation.The European respiratory journal · 2024Review
- Cardiac catheterization in pulmonary arterial hypertension: Tips and tricks to enhance diagnosis and guide therapy.International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease · 2024Review
- Cardiac magnetic resonance haemodynamics in paediatric heart transplant patients: fick oximetry versus cardiac magnetic resonance phase contrast.Cardiology in the young · 2024Article
- Article
- Real-time automatic image-based slice tracking of gadolinium-filled balloon wedge catheter during MR-guided cardiac catheterization: A proof-of-concept study.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- Interventional cardiovascular magnetic resonance: state-of-the-art.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Review
- Automatic image-based tracking of gadolinium-filled balloon wedge catheters for MRI-guided cardiac catheterization using deep learning.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Improved catheter tracking during cardiovascular magnetic resonance-guided cardiac catheterization using overlay visualization.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2022Article
- MRI-Guided Cardiac Catheterization in Congenital Heart Disease: How to Get Started.Current cardiology reports · 2022Review
- Role of Cross-Sectional Imaging in Pediatric Interventional Cardiac Catheterization.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Direct assessment of total cavopulmonary connection power loss with interventional cardiac magnetic resonance in Fontan circulation.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic ResonanceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac catheterization and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging have distinct diagnostic roles in the congenital heart disease (CHD) population. Invasive CMR (iCMR) allows for a more thorough assessment of cardiac hemodynamics at the same time under the same conditions. It is assumed but not proven that iCMR gives an incremental value by providing more accurate flow quantification.
methodsSubjects with CHD underwent real-time 1.5 T iCMR using a passive catheter tracking technique with partial saturation pulse of 40° to visualize the gadolinium-filled balloon, CMR-conditional guidewire, and cardiac structures simultaneously to aid in completion of right (RHC) and left heart catheterization (LHC). Repeat iCMR and catheterization measurements were performed to compare reliability by the Pearson (PCC) and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC).
resultsThirty CHD (20 single ventricle and 10 bi-ventricular) subjects with a median age and weight of 8.3 years (2-33) and 27.7 kg (9.2-80), respectively, successfully underwent iCMR RHC and LHC. No catheter related complications were encountered. Time taken for first pass RHC and LHC/aortic pull back was 5.1, and 2.9 min, respectively. Total success rate to obtain required data points to complete Fick principle calculations for all patients was 321/328 (98%). One patient with multiple shunts was an outlier and excluded from further analysis. The PCC for catheter-derived pulmonary blood flow (Qp) (0.89, p < 0.001) is slightly lower than iCMR-derived Qp (0.96, p < 0.001), whereas catheter-derived systemic blood flow (Qs) (0.62, p = < 0.001) was considerably lower than iCMR-derived Qs (0.94, p < 0.001). CCC agreement for Qp at baseline (C1-CCC = 0.65, 95% CI 0.41-0.81) and retested conditions (C2-CCC = 0.78, 95% CI 0.58-0.89) were better than for Qs at baseline (C1-CCC = 0.22, 95% CI - 0.15-0.53) and retested conditions (C2-CCC = 0.52, 95% CI 0.17-0.76).
conclusionThis study further validates hemodynamic measurements obtained via iCMR. iCMR-derived flows have considerably higher test-retest reliability for Qs. iCMR evaluations allow for more reproducible hemodynamic assessments in the CHD population.
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.