ArticlePloS one2024
Reliability of left ventricular hemodynamic forces derived from feature-tracking cardiac magnetic resonance.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Left ventricular strain and hemodynamic forces from cine CMR for detecting constrictive physiology in pericarditis.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Hemodynamic forces derived from cine cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: technical aspects, applications in various clinical scenarios, and in athlete's heart.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Force Reversal During Systolic-Diastolic Transition Provides Incremental Prognostic Value over LVEF for Heart Failure After STEMI.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of left ventricular hemodynamic forces measured by transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in healthy adults.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Differences in cardiac mechanics assessed by left ventricular hemodynamic forces in athletes and patients with hypertension.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHemodynamic forces (HDF) analysis has been proposed as a method to quantify intraventricular pressure gradients, however data on its reliability are still scanty. Thus, the aim of this study is to assess the reliability of HDF parameters derived from cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR).
methodsCMR studies of 25 athletes were analysed by two independent observers and then re-analysed by the same observer one week apart. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC [95% CI]) and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess association, agreement, and bias of the longitudinal (A-B) HDF, transverse (L-S) HDF, and Impulse Angle. The sample size required to detect a relative change in the HDF parameters was also calculated.
resultsIn terms of inter-observer variability, there was a good correlation for the A-B and L-S (ICC 0.85 [0.67-0.93] and 0.86 [0.69-0.94]; p<0.001 for both, respectively) and a moderate correlation for the Impulse Angle (ICC 0.73 [0.39-0.87]; p = 0.001). For intra-observer variability, A-B and L-S showed excellent correlation (ICC 0.91 [0.78-0.93] and 0.93 [0.83-0.97]; p<0.001 for both, respectively). Impulse Angle presented good correlation (ICC 0.80 [0.56-0.90]; p<0.001). Frame selection and aortic valve area measurements were the most vulnerable step in terms of reliability of the method. Sample size calculation to detect relative changes ranged from n = 1 to detect a 15% relative change in Impulse Angle to n = 171 for the detection of 10% relative change in A-B HDF.
conclusionsThe results of this study showed a low inter- and intra-observer variability of HDF parameters derived from feature-tracking CMR. This provides the fundamental basis for their use both in research and clinical practice, which could eventually lead to the detection of significant changes at follow-up studies.
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.