ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2024
Right ventricular scalloping index as cardiac magnetic resonance-derived marker for diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy.
Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 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, 0 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) evaluation of right ventricular (RV) morphologic abnormalities in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is subjective. Here, we aimed to use a quantitative index, the right ventricular scalloping index (RVSI), to standardize the measurement of RV free wall scalloping and aid in the imaging diagnosis.
methodsWe retrospectively included 15 patients with definite ARVC and 45 age- and sex-matched patients with idiopathic right ventricular outflow tract ventricular arrhythmia (RVOT-VA) as controls. The RVSI was measured from cine images on four-chamber view to evaluate its ability to distinguish between ARVC and RVOT-VA patients. Other cardiac functional parameters including strain analysis were also performed.
resultsThe RVSI was significantly higher in the ARVC than RVOT-VA group (1.56 ± 0.23 vs 1.30 ± 0.08, p < 0.001). The diagnostic performance of the RVSI was superior to the RV global longitudinal, circumferential, and radial strains, RV ejection fraction, and RV end-diastolic volume index. The RVSI demonstrated high intraobserver and interobserver reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.94 and 0.96, respectively). RVSI was a strong discriminator between ARVC and RVOT-VA patients (area under curve [AUC], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.82-0.99). A cutoff value of RVSI ≥1.49 provided an accuracy of 90.0%, specificity of 97.8%, sensitivity of 66.7%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 90.9%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 89.8%. In a multivariable analysis, a family history of ARVC or sudden cardiac death (odds ratio, 38.71; 95% CI, 1.48-1011.05; p = 0.028) and an RVSI ≥1.49 (odds ratio, 64.72; 95% CI, 4.58-914.63; p = 0.002) remained predictive of definite ARVC.
conclusionRVSI is a quantitative method with good performance for the diagnosis of definite ARVC.
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.