ArticleEuropean heart journal. Imaging methods and practice2025
Standard breath-hold versus free-breathing real-time cine cardiac MRI-a prospective randomized comparison in patients with known or suspected cardiac disease.
Article in European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05221853 (Comparison of Standard Breath-hold Cardiac MRI With a Faster, Free-breathing Scan), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Comparison of Standard Breath-hold Cardiac MRI With a Faster, Free-breathing Scan
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accelerated stress CMR for the detection of significant coronary artery disease: a prospective randomized diagnostic accuracy study.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2026Trial
- Free-Breathing Dynamic, Regularized, Adaptive Cluster Optimization (DRACO) Cine Cardiac MRI in Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Article
- AI-surrogate structure and dose correlation for left anterior descending artery in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Vasoactive breathing manoeuvres as an effective coronary vasodilator in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a prospective comparative oxygenation-sensitive CMR study.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2025Article
- Cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus coronary computed tomography angiography with fractional flow reserve for diagnosing obstructive coronary artery disease in higher risk patients: rationale and design of CONCORD-A prospective, single-center diagnostic accuracy study.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic ResonanceArticle
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
Aims: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is established as the reference standard for cardiac volumetric assessment. Despite the accuracy and robustness of steady-state free precession (SSFP) cine imaging, its use may prove challenging in patients with arrhythmia and in those who cannot perform repeated breath holds. An alternative solution may be a free-breathing electrocardiogram (ECG)-triggered, retro-gated, real-time cine sequence. This study sought to compare left ventricular volumetric, wall motion, and thickness assessment with both techniques. Methods and results: Consecutive patients with known or suspected cardiac disease referred for clinical CMR were studied at 3-Tesla. Participants underwent short-axis standard SSFP and real-time cine imaging in a randomized order within the same scan. Between sequence agreement and mean difference were compared for end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), stroke volume, ejection fraction (EF), left ventricular mass (LVM), maximal wall thickness (MWT), and wall motion score index (WMSi). Two hundred and two patients (mean age 61 ± 14 years, 51% male and 14% irregular rhythm) were studied. All left ventricular indices showed good-excellent agreement between the two methods [intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence interval), EDV 0.96 (0.95-0.97), ESV 0.96 (0.94-0.97), EF 0.85 (0.81-0.88), LVM 0.93 (0.91-0.95), MWT 0.80 (0.75-0.85), and WMSi 0.93 (0.91-0.95)]. Conclusion: In patients with known or suspected cardiac disease, real-time cine imaging demonstrates good-excellent reproducibility of LV volumetric, wall thickness and resting wall motion assessment when compared with standard SSFP (Trial registration: NCT05221853).
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.