ArticleClinical and experimental emergency medicine2023
A study on computed tomography cardiothoracic ratio in predicting left ventricular systolic dysfunction.
Article in Clinical and experimental emergency medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of echocardiographic abnormalities in asymptomatic individuals with increased cardiothoracic ratio detected on chest radiography.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
- Comparison of Deep Learning Architectures for Cardiac Contour Segmentation in Catheterization Radiographs.Cureus · 2026Article
- Novel Indexes in the Assessment of Cardiac Enlargement Using Chest Radiography: A New Look at an Old Problem.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Radiologic evaluation of subclinical cardiovascular structural changes in school cafeteria workers: a chest computed tomography study with age-matched controls.Journal of Yeungnam medical science · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA cardiothoracic ratio ≥0.50 is widely used as an indicator of cardiomegaly, but associations between the cardiothoracic ratio and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) have not been investigated previously. We conducted this study to investigate the relationship between cardiothoracic ratio measured using computed tomography (CT) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and to determine the optimal cardiothoracic ratio for predicting left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was performed using data from patients who underwent both chest CT and echocardiography at the emergency department from January 1 to December 31, 2021. The patients were classified as normal, or having mild, moderate, and severe LVSD based on their LVEF, and the cardiothoracic ratios of each group were compared. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were used to identify the optimal cardiothoracic ratio for prediction of mild, moderate, and severe LVSD.
resultsThe final study population included 444 patients. The median CT-measured cardiothoracic ratio was 0.54 for patients with normal LVEF, and 0.60 for patients with LVSD (P<0.001). The optimal CT-measured cardiothoracic ratios for predicting mild, moderate, and severe LVSD were 0.56, 0.59, and 0.60, and their areas under the ROC curve were 0.653, 0.690, and 0.680, and negative predictive values were 90%, 94%, and 98%, respectively.
conclusionThe best cutoff value for a CT-measured cardiothoracic ratio suggestive of LVSD was 0.56, which is very different from the 0.50 value typically considered an abnormal cardiothoracic ratio. The CT-measured cardiothoracic ratio ≥0.56 can be used as a rough indicator of mild LVSD, and a ratio <0.60 can exclude severe LVSD with a high degree of confidence.
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.