ArticleJournal of echocardiography2025
Reproducibility of the systolic and diastolic energy loss of the left ventricle in vector flow mapping.
Article in Journal of echocardiography, 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
backgroundVector Flow Mapping (VFM) is a novel technique for visualizing intracardiac blood flow. A few reports have been made regarding the reproducibility of energy loss (EL) measurements using VFM. This study aims to elucidate the intra-class and inter-class correlation coefficient (intra-ICC and inter-ICC) in the EL measurements.
methodsSeven healthy participants were enrolled, and echocardiographic data were obtained by two cardiac sonographers (14 images). Three independent analysts analyzed all images in three different cardiac cycles three times: 378 data points (14 images × analysts × 3 cardiac cycles × 3 times). The intra-ICC (1, 1) and inter-ICC (2, 1) were calculated. Furthermore, the intra-ICC (1, k) and inter-ICC (2, k) were applied using the averaged EL value in three cardiac cycles. An ICC value greater than 0.75 was defined as acceptable reproducibility.
resultsIn diastole, the intra-ICC (1, 1) by the three analysts was 0.890, 0.830, and 0.802; the intra-ICC (1, k), using the average EL value was 0.986, 0.978, and 0.973. In systole, the intra-ICC (1, 1) was 0.729, 0.698, and 0.733; the intra-ICC (1, k) was 0.960, 0.954, and 0.961. In diastole, the inter-ICC (2, 1) was 0.950, and the inter-ICC (2, k) was 0.958. In contrast, in systole, the inter-ICC (2, 1) was 0.772, and the inter-ICC (2, k) was 0.774; these values were lower than those in diastole.
conclusionsThese findings indicate that the intra- and inter-measurer reproducibility of diastolic and systolic EL is favorable for clinical use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40279089What 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.