ArticleScientific reports2024
Comprehensive characterization of cardiac contraction for improved post-infarction risk assessment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- AI Applied to Cardiac Magnetic Resonance for Precision Medicine in Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims at identifying risk-related patterns of left ventricular contraction dynamics via novel volume transient characterization. A multicenter cohort of AMI survivors (n = 1021) who underwent Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) after infarction was considered for the study. The clinical endpoint was the 12-month rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE, n = 73), consisting of all-cause death, reinfarction, and new congestive heart failure. Cardiac function was characterized from CMR in 3 potential directions: by (1) volume temporal transients (i.e. contraction dynamics); (2) feature tracking strain analysis (i.e. bulk tissue peak contraction); and (3) 3D shape analysis (i.e. 3D contraction morphology). A fully automated pipeline was developed to extract conventional and novel artificial-intelligence-derived metrics of cardiac contraction, and their relationship with MACE was investigated. Any of the 3 proposed directions demonstrated its additional prognostic value on top of established CMR indexes, myocardial injury markers, basic characteristics, and cardiovascular risk factors (P < 0.001). The combination of these 3 directions of enhancement towards a final CMR risk model improved MACE prediction by 13% compared to clinical baseline (0.774 (0.771-0.777) vs. 0.683 (0.681-0.685) cross-validated AUC, P < 0.001). The study evidences the contribution of the novel contraction characterization, enabled by a fully automated pipeline, to post-infarction assessment.
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.