ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
Real-Time Assessment of Pulmonary Blood Flow in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis Using the Fluoroscopic Flow Calculator.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 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
Background: Restenosis in pediatric pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) is common and requires careful monitoring. Lung perfusion scintigraphy (LPS) is often used but involves excess radiation, is resource-intensive, and can cause patient discomfort, with no real-time data available. This study evaluated the fluoroscopic flow calculator (FFC) as a real-time tool for estimating pulmonary blood flow (Qp) using angiograms during catheterization, with the potential to replace or complement LPS. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on patients with PVS who underwent cardiac catheterization between April 1, 2023, and March 31, 2024 at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. The study included patients who had a right ventricular angiogram and available LPS data. The FFC tool was used to analyze angiograms and estimate Qp distribution. Accuracy was assessed by comparing FFC predictions to LPS measurements using median absolute error and Bland-Altman analysis. Results: The study included 21 procedures involving 18 patients, with a median age of 17 months. The FFC tool provided accurate predictions of Qp distribution, with a median absolute error of 3%. In 76% of cases, the predicted flow split was within 5% of the LPS measurement, and all cases were within 7%. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a minimal bias of +0.3%, with no systematic bias at the extremes of the flow-split distribution. Conclusions: The FFC tool shows promise in estimating Qp distribution during cardiac catheterization in PVS patients. Further research is needed to refine the FFC method, particularly incorporating segmental lung information, and to evaluate its real-time use during catheterization.
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.