ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2023
Left-ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from cardiac ECG-gated
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostics in cardio-oncology: a focus on anthracyclines.Heart failure reviews · 2026Review
- Multimodal Machine Learning Integrating N-13 Ammonia PET and Clinical Variables Predicts Major Adverse Cardiac Events.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Quantitation of mitral regurgitation using positron emission tomography.EJNMMI research · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
methodsTwenty-four patients with known or suspected CAD underwent a simultaneous ECG-gated cardiac PET/MR scan. The
resultsThe correlation between PET and CMR was strong for volumes (r > 0.84) and moderate for EF (r = 0.52), where the moderate correlation for EF was partly due to the small range of EF values. Agreement was high for all parameters, with a slight overestimation of PET values for end-diastolic volume but with no significant mean bias for other parameters. Inter- and intra-observer agreement of volumes was high and comparable between PET and CMR. For EF, inter-observer agreement was higher for PET and intra-observer agreement was higher for CMR.
conclusionLV volumes and EF can be calculated by first-pass analysis of a
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.