ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2024
Discordance interpretation of left ventricular size between echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance in pediatric patients with aortic/mitral regurgitation.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study investigated discordance between echocardiography (echo) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) measurements of the left ventricle (LV) in pediatric patients with aortic and/or mitral regurgitation (AR/MR).
methodsRetrospective cohort study of pediatric patients. The cohorts were comprised of patients with AR/MR vs. non-AR/MR. Left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV) by CMR and left ventricular internal diameter diastolic (LVIDd) by echo were obtained from clinical reports then echo images were reviewed to remeasure LVEDV by bullet method. Left ventricular internal diameter systolic (LVIDs) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measurements by echo and LVEF by CMR were obtained from clinical reports. Fractional shortening (FS%) was recalculated. Z-scores were calculated using normative data. Correlation between echo and CMR LV measurements was assessed using correlation coefficients. Bland-Altman plots assessed bias between imaging modalities. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed for detection of LV enlargement and LV dysfunction.
resultsAR/MR patients had greater discrepancy in LV size interpretation by Z-score compared to non-AR/MR patients. This discrepancy persisted when the bullet method short axis measurements were incorporated. There was negative bias in echo-based measurements compared to CMR. The diagnostic performance of echo in identifying moderate LV enlargement was worse for AR/MR pediatrics patients.
conclusionThe discordant interpretation of LV size by echo compared to CMR is worse in pediatric patients with AR/MR when compared to patients without AR/MR even when short axis measurements are incorporated. This finding suggests non-uniform geometrical changes in the LV as it enlarges due to AR/MR.
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.