ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Effect of a breathing exercise program on coronary artery motion artifacts in 256 rows of coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with different heart rate variability.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. 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.
- Comparative evaluation of diaphragmatic and myocardial navigation in coronary magnetic resonance imaging.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coronary artery motion artifact is a major limitation of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of respiratory status on coronary motion artifacts under different heart rate variability (HRV) conditions. Methods: Between January 2022 and January 2024, 935 CCTA patients were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to a breath-holding group (group A) and a free-breathing group (group B), and each group was subdivided into three subgroups based on HRV ≤3 bpm, HRV 4-10 bpm, and HRV ≥11 bpm. Subjective image quality was assessed using a four-point Likert scale: 4 points = excellent, no artifacts; 1 point = severe artifacts, unassessable. Between-group comparisons were made to contrast and analyze the subjective image quality of the three subgroups in the free-breathing protocol and the breath-holding protocol. Within-group comparisons were compared and contrasted to analyze the relationship between subjective image quality and HRV. Results: In the between-group comparisons, with the breath-holding protocol as a comparison, HRV ≤3 bpm (3.95±0.32 Conclusions: The combination of a 140-ms time resolution, a 16-cm wide detector, and the second-generation reconstruction algorithm can be used jointly to realize free-breathing CCTA under different HRV conditions, which broadens the application range of CCTA.
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.