ArticleCardiovascular journal of Africa
Prognostic value of myocardial scar in ischaemic and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Cardiovascular journal of Africa. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Revascularization in Ischemic Left Ventricular Dysfunction.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Diagnostics and Cardiovascular Risk Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this research was to evaluate the prognostic value of myocardial scar using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM).
methodsOne hundred and fifty-four patients with either ICM or NICM underwent CMR with late gadolinium enhancement sequences for assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and detection and quantification of any myocardial scar using three methods: manual, number of segments involved, and percentage of scarred myocardium. Patients were followed up for at least six months for clinical cardiac events.
resultsPatients were divided into two groups: group I, patients with ICM (58%) and group II, those with NICM (42%). Clinical presentation ranged from eventless lpar;10%) to chest pain (18%), heart failure (15%), hospitalisation (35%), syncope (1%), ventricular tachycardia (< 1%) and cardiac arrest (< 1%). The scar mass was larger in size in group I (17 ± 15%) than in group II (8 ± 13%). A direct relationship was observed between scar size and event severity (
conclusionsMyocardial scar size was a strong predictor of clinical outcome in both the ICM and NICM patients. LVEF was less reliable in predicting morbidity in cardiomyopathy patients.
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.