ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Magnetization-transfer flow-independent dark-blood delayed enhancement cardiac MRI optimizes discrimination of ST-elevation myocardial infarct borders.
Article in European radiology, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo prospectively compare image quality and infarct sizing methods between magnetization-transfer "flow-independent dark-blood delayed enhancement" (MT-FIDDLE) and standard "bright-blood"-late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac-magnetic-resonance (CMR) sequence.
methods"Bright-blood"-LGE and MT-FIDDLE sequence were acquired in 110 patients at 4 days (n = 33), 4 months (n = 39) and 12 months (n = 38) after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Subjective image quality, including confidence in infarct segmentation and blood-pool bordering, were each rated on a 4-point Likert scale. Objective image quality was assessed by the detectability index (DI). Infarct volumes derived via full-width at half-maximum (FWHM) and different number of standard deviations ("n-SD") methods on MT-FIDDLE images were compared with FWHM and reference 5-SD results from "bright-blood-LGE images.
resultsOverall subjective median image quality was excellent for both LGE sequences. Qualitative analysis revealed a significantly higher confidence in infarct segmentation and in blood-pool bordering for MT-FIDDLE as compared to "bright-blood"-LGE (all p < 0.001). Infarct volumes assessed by the FWHM technique on MT-FIDDLE and "bright-blood"-LGE showed excellent agreement overall (Concordance correlation coefficient, CCC = 0.96). The 3-SD technique for MT-FIDDLE showed the best agreement with the 5-SD method for "bright-blood"-LGE overall (CCC = 0.94), as well as in the subgroup with excellent confidence in infarct segmentation on "bright-blood"-LGE (CCC = 0.96). DI of scar versus LV blood-pool was higher for MT-FIDDLE (8.9 ± 5.5) compared to "bright-blood"-LGE sequence (2.0 ± 1.5; p < 0.001).
conclusionMT-FIDDLE significantly optimizes the discrimination between myocardial infarction and adjacent blood-pool in STEMI patients. As compared to the established 5-SD technique on "bright-blood"-LGE, the 3-SD method on MT-FIDDLE results in consistent infarct volumes. KEY POINTS: Question Does magnetization-transfer "flow-independent dark-blood delayed enhancement" (MT-FIDDLE) offer any benefits over standard "bright-blood"-late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac-magnetic-resonance (CMR) for identifying STEMI infarct borders? Findings MT-FIDDLE image quality was higher than LGE CMR and measured infarct volume comparability to the standard 5-SD-threshold-technique. Clinical relevance MT-FIDDLE facilitates the assessment of myocardial infarctions at the subendocardial border, improving the discrimination between myocardial infarction and adjacent blood-pool in STEMI patients.
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.