ArticleScientific reports2024
Clinical implementation of a fully automated quantitative perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging workflow with a simplified dual-bolus contrast administration scheme.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early quantitative stress-perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance reveals perfusion abnormalities consistent with coronary microvascular dysfunction in MINOCA patients with otherwise normal cardiac magnetic resonance findings.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Coronary Flow Reserve in Adults: Pathophysiology, Assessment Modalities, Clinical Applications, and Prognostic Significance.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Quantitative perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: same same but different.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- Stress T1 mapping and quantitative perfusion cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2025Article
- Quantitative perfusion by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging reveals compromised myocardial perfusion in patients with angina with non-obstructive coronary artery disease.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This study clinically implemented a ready-to-use quantitative perfusion (QP) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (QP CMR) workflow, encompassing a simplified dual-bolus gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA) administration scheme and fully automated QP image post-processing. Twenty-five patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) underwent both adenosine stress perfusion CMR and an invasive coronary angiography or coronary computed tomography angiography. The dual-bolus protocol consisted of a pre-bolus (0.0075 mmol/kg GBCA at 0.5 mmol/ml concentration + 20 ml saline) and a main bolus (0.075 mmol/kg GBCA at 0.5 mmol/ml concentration + 20 ml saline) at an infusion rate of 3 ml/s. The arterial input function curves showed excellent quality. Stress MBF ≤ 1.84 ml/g/min accurately detected obstructive CAD (area under the curve 0.79; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.66 to 0.89). Combined visual assessment of color pixel QP maps and conventional perfusion images yielded a diagnostic accuracy of 84%, sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 93%. The proposed easy-to-use dual-bolus QP CMR workflow provides good image quality and holds promise for high accuracy in diagnosis of obstructive CAD. Implementation of this approach has the potential to serve as an alternative to current methods thus increasing the accessibility to offer high-quality QP CMR imaging by a wide range of CMR laboratories.
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.