ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2022
Effective Study: Development and Application of a Question-Driven, Time-Effective Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Scanning Protocol.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimization of Respiratory Training Methods for Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Article
- Use of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging after hospitalization for acute heart failure: insights from the French nationwide OFICA-2 cohort.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026Article
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Asia: 2025 Status Update.Korean journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Improving Patient Access and Scanning Efficiency in Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Prediction of late left ventricular thrombus formation after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A cardiovascular magnetic resonance study.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2025Article
- The Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Athletic Individuals-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Deep learning super-resolution reconstruction for fast and high-quality cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance.European radiology · 2025Article
- Feasibility and Role of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Intensive and Acute Cardiovascular Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Reslice3Dto2D: Introduction of a software tool to reformat 3D volumes into reference 2D slices in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.BMC research notes · 2024Article
- AI-powered contrast-free cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for myocardial infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- An accurate and time-efficient deep learning-based system for automated segmentation and reporting of cardiac magnetic resonance-detected ischemic scar.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Long scanning times impede cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) clinical uptake. A "one-size-fits-all" shortened, focused protocol (eg, only function and late-gadolinium enhancement) reduces scanning time and costs, but provides less information. We developed 2 question-driven CMR and stress-CMR protocols, including tailored advanced tissue characterization, and tested their effectiveness in reducing scanning time while retaining the diagnostic performances of standard protocols. Methods and Results Eighty three consecutive patients with cardiomyopathy or ischemic heart disease underwent the tailored CMR. Each scan consisted of standard cines, late-gadolinium enhancement imaging, native T1-mapping, and extracellular volume. Fat/edema modules, right ventricle cine, and in-line quantitative perfusion mapping were performed as clinically required. Workflow was optimized to avoid gaps. Time target was <30 minutes for a CMR and <35 minutes for a stress-CMR. CMR was considered impactful when its results drove changes in diagnosis or management. Advanced tissue characterization was considered impactful when it changed the confidence level in the diagnosis. The quality of the images was assessed. A control group of 137 patients was identified among scans performed before February 2020. Compared with standard protocols, the average scan duration dropped by >30% (CMR: from 42±8 to 28±6 minutes; stress-CMR: from 50±10 to 34±6 minutes, both
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.