ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2024
Incremental prognostic value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in patients with severe LV dysfunction undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.
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. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Proteomics in Obesity: Unpacking the Molecular Puzzle.Current obesity reports · 2024Pooled it
- Multimodality Cardiovascular Imaging in Patients After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Diagnosis and Risk Stratification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
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
Abstract
backgroundCoronary artery disease (CAD) remains a significant global health issue, particularly when complicated by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 35%. Although coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is recommended for such cases, the unclear prognosis necessitates further investigation.
methodThis retrospective study aimed to determine whether cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging provides additional prognostic value in guiding effective clinical management. The study included patients with CAD and LVEF < 35% who underwent CABG surgery after enhanced CMR between March 2016 and March 2023. CMR was performed using a 3.0T scanner with steady-state free precession and phase-sensitive inversion recovery sequences. Prognostic analysis of clinical and CMR data was conducted, with the endpoint defined as cardiovascular death, revascularization, hospitalization for heart failure, or stroke. Statistical analysis included Student's t-test, chi-squared test, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis, receiver operating characteristic analysis, Harrell C statistical analysis, integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and net reclassification improvement (NRI) analysis.
resultThe study included 152 patients (mean age 58.6 ± 9.7 years; 138 men). During a mean follow-up of 2.0 years, 8 patients experienced cardiovascular death, while 1 case had revascularization, 13 had hospitalization for heart failure, and 11 had a stroke. Left atrial diameter index (LADi) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-1.15]; P = 0.04) and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) mass (HR, 1.03 [95% CI: 1.01-1.06]; P < 0.001) were associated with the endpoint, even after adjusting for multiple clinical variables. Adding LADi and LGE mass improved risk prediction for adverse events, as indicated by the C-index (0.738, p < 0.01), IDI (0.36), and NRI (0.13).
conclusionLeft atrial diameter index (LADi) and scar burden are valuable prognostic indicators in patients with LVEF < 35% undergoing CABG. They offer enhanced risk stratification beyond traditional clinical factors, highlighting their importance in guiding clinical management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39093366What 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.