Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34876127›Full record

SynthesisCardiovascular ultrasound2021

Evaluation of intraventricular flow by multimodality imaging: a review and meta-analysis.

Ferit Onur Mutluer, Nikki van der Velde, Jason Voorneveld, Johan G Bosch, Jolien W Roos-Hesselink, Rob J van der Geest, Alexander Hirsch, Annemien van den Bosch

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cardiovascular ultrasound, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Effect of the Mitral Valve on the Intra Ventricular Hemodynamics.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Effect of Aging on Intraventricular Kinetic Energy and Energy Dissipation.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

8 authors.

Ferit Onur MutluerDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Nikki van der VeldeDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jason VoorneveldBiomedical Engineering, Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Johan G BoschBiomedical Engineering, Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jolien W Roos-HesselinkDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Rob J van der GeestDepartment of Radiology, Division of Image Processing, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Alexander HirschDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Annemien van den BoschDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. a.e.vandenbosch@erasmusmc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current inter-modality agreement of noninvasive clinical intraventricular flow (IVF) assessment with 3 emerging imaging modalities: echocardiographic particle image velocimetry (EPIV), vector flow mapping (VFM), and 4-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow CMR).

methodsWe performed a systematic literature review in the databases EMBASE, Medline OVID and Cochrane Central for identification of studies evaluating left ventricular (LV) flow patterns using one of these flow visualization modalities. Of the 2224 initially retrieved records, 10 EPIV, 23 VFM, and 25 4D flow CMR studies were included in the final analysis.

resultsVortex parameters were more extensively studied with EPIV, while LV energetics and LV transport mechanics were mainly studied with 4D flow CMR, and LV energy loss and vortex circulation were implemented by VFM studies. Pooled normative values are provided for these parameters. The meta- analysis for the values of two vortex morphology parameters, vortex length and vortex depth, failed to reveal a significant change between heart failure patients and healthy controls.

conclusionAgreement between the different modalities studying intraventricular flow is low and different methods of measurement and reporting were used among studies. A multimodality framework with a standardized set of flow parameters is necessary for implementation of noninvasive flow visualization in daily clinical practice. The full potential of noninvasive flow visualization in addition to diagnostics could also include guiding medical or interventional treatment.

Indexed as

Heart FailureVentricular Function, LeftBlood Flow VelocityEchocardiographyHeart VentriclesHumansMagnetic Resonance Imaging4d-flow cardiovascular magnetic resonanceEchocardiographyFlow mappingFlow visualizationIntraventricular flowMultimodality imagingvortex flow

Identifiers

PMID34876127
PMCPMC8653587

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.