Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37482604›Full record

ReviewJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2023

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology: a comprehensive summary and update.

Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Jeanette Schulz-Menger

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. 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

2 authors.

Florian von Knobelsdorff-BrenkenhoffKIZ-Kardiologie Im Zentrum, and Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0745-6062
Jeanette Schulz-MengerWorking Group Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a Joint Cooperation Between the Charité Medical Faculty and the Max-Delbrueck Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany. jeanette.schulz-menger@charite.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has been established as a valuable tool in clinical and scientific cardiology. This study summarizes the current evidence and role of CMR in the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and is an update of a former guideline analysis.

methodsSince the last guideline analysis performed in 2015, 28 new ESC guideline documents have been published. Twenty-seven ESC practice guidelines are currently in use. They were screened regarding CMR in the text, tables and figures. The main CMR-related sentences and recommendations were extracted.

resultsNineteen of the 27 guidelines (70.4%) contain relevant text passages regarding CMR in the text and include 92 specific recommendations regarding the use of CMR. Seven guidelines (25.9%) mention CMR in the text, and 1 (3.7%, dyslipidemia) does not mention CMR. The 19 guidelines with recommendations regarding the use of CMR contain 40 class-I recommendations (43.5%), 28 class-IIa recommendations (30.4%), 19 class-IIb recommendations (20.7%) and 5 class-III recommendations (5.4%). Most of the recommendations have evidence level C (56/92; 60.9%), followed by level B (34/92; 37.0%) and level A (2/92; 2.2%). Twenty-one recommendations refer to the field of cardiomyopathies, 21 recommendations to stress perfusion imaging, 20 recommendations to vascular assessment, 12 to myocardial tissue characterization in general, 8 to left and right ventricular function assessment, 5 to the pericardium and 5 to myocarditis.

conclusionsCMR is integral part of the majority of the ESC guidelines. Its representation in the guidelines has increased since the last analysis from 2015, now comprising 92 instead of formerly 63 specific recommendations. To enable patient management in accordance to the ESC guidelines, CMR must become more widely available.

Indexed as

CardiologyHeartHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyPredictive Value of TestsCardiovascular magnetic resonanceESCGuideline

Identifiers

PMID37482604
PMCPMC10364363

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.