Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35864534›Full record

ReviewJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2022

SCMR expert consensus statement for cardiovascular magnetic resonance of acquired and non-structural pediatric heart disease.

Adam L Dorfman, Tal Geva, Margaret M Samyn, Gerald Greil, Rajesh Krishnamurthy, Daniel Messroghli, Pierluigi Festa, Aurelio Secinaro, Brian Soriano, Andrew Taylor and 3 more

Abstract readReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Post-MIS-C cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review.European journal of pediatrics · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. How to behave with paediatric myocarditis: imaging methods and clinical considerations.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Adam L DorfmanDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, University of Michigan C.S. Mott Children's Hospital, 1540 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. adamdorf@med.umich.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1229-3774
Tal GevaDepartment of Cardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, 300 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Margaret M SamynDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Medical College of Wisconsin/Herma Heart Institute, Children's Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA.
Gerald GreilDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75235, USA.
Rajesh KrishnamurthyDepartment of Radiology, Nationwide Children's Hospital, 700 Children's Dr. E4A, Columbus, OH, 43205, USA.
Daniel MessroghliDepartment of Internal Medicine-Cardiology, Deutsches Herzzentrum Berlin and Charité-University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Pierluigi FestaDepartment of Cardiology, Fondazione Toscana G. Monasterio, Massa, Italy.
Aurelio SecinaroAdvanced Cardiothoracic Imaging Unit, Department of Imaging, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Brian SorianoDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Seattle Children's Hospital, 4800 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA.
Andrew TaylorDepartment of Cardiovascular Imaging, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children, University College London, London, UK.
Michael D TaylorDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, 3333 Burnet Ave #2129, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA.
René M BotnarSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Wyman W LaiCHOC Children's, 1201 W. La Veta Avenue, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is widely used for diagnostic imaging in the pediatric population. In addition to structural congenital heart disease (CHD), for which published guidelines are available, CMR is also performed for non-structural pediatric heart disease, for which guidelines are not available. This article provides guidelines for the performance and reporting of CMR in the pediatric population for non-structural ("non-congenital") heart disease, including cardiomyopathies, myocarditis, Kawasaki disease and systemic vasculitides, cardiac tumors, pericardial disease, pulmonary hypertension, heart transplant, and aortopathies. Given important differences in disease pathophysiology and clinical manifestations as well as unique technical challenges related to body size, heart rate, and sedation needs, these guidelines focus on optimization of the CMR examination in infants and children compared to adults. Disease states are discussed, including the goals of CMR examination, disease-specific protocols, and limitations and pitfalls, as well as newer techniques that remain under development.

Indexed as

Heart Defects, CongenitalMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultChildConsensusHumansInfantMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyPredictive Value of TestsCardiovascular magnetic resonanceChildrenGuidelinesPediatric heart disease

Identifiers

PMID35864534
PMCPMC9302232

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.