ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2025
Head-to-head comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography in the general population (MATCH).
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03934957 (A Single Center, Prospective, Epidemiologic Cohort Study With Emphasis on Imaging to Improve the Identification of Individuals at Risk for Major Chronic Diseases and to Improve Early Diagnosis and Survival), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
A Single Center, Prospective, Epidemiologic Cohort Study With Emphasis on Imaging to Improve the Identification of Individuals at Risk for Major Chronic Diseases and to Improve Early Diagnosis and Survival
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Persistent long-term subclinical myocardial changes in multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children revealed by cardiac magnetic resonance and galectin-3.World journal of clinical pediatrics · 2026Article
- International practices and variability in right heart echocardiography: results from the RVNet(Work) international survey.Echo research and practice · 2026Article
- Prognostic Value of Left-Ventricular Filling Pressure Estimated by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Patients With Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Heart failure and predictors of outcome in eosinophilic myocarditis: a real-world cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Assessment of aortic and mitral valve regurgitation volumes by cardiovascular magnetic resonance in participants without valvular heart disease in the Hamburg City Health Study population.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- Ejection fraction quantification from ungated chest CT by AI.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- The Relationship Between Myocardial Fibrosis in Hypertensive Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction and the Severity of Systemic Inflammatory Status Is Mediated by Epicardial Adipose Tissue: A Multicenter Cohort Study.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
- Heart Failure Syndromes: Different Definitions of Different Diseases-Do We Need Separate Guidelines? A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComparing transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is crucial for cardiac assessment. This study aims to clarify their comparability in a large population sample.
methodsCMR and two- (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) TTE were used to quantify left and right heart dimensions in participants of the Hamburg City Health Study. Intertechnique agreement was evaluated using Bland-Altman analyses, Pearson correlation coefficients, and Cohen's Kappa.
resultsData from 2126 participants (median age 67 [IQR: 59-72] years, 897 (42.2%) female) were analyzed. Left ventricular (LV) diastolic volumes were similar (CMR: 117.0 [96.2, 138.0] ml, 2D-TTE: 111.8 [93.6, 134.3] ml, r = 0.7, p < 0.001), while systolic volumes were lower with CMR (CMR: 36.0 [26.9, 46.0] ml, 2D-TTE: 46.7 [37.9, 57.5] ml, r = 0.67, p < 0.001). CMR LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was 10% higher than 2D-TTE (CMR = 69.0 [64.0, 74.0]%, 2D-TTE = 58.3 [55.5, 61.7]%, p < 0.001; r = 0.40, p < 0.001). Left atrial volumes correlated moderately with low bias (CMR: 53.0 [40.0, 68.0] ml, 2D-TTE: 51.6 [41.5, 64.0] ml, r = 0.63, p < 0.001). LV mass showed good correlation but was higher using 2D-TTE (r = 0.74, p < 0.001). Right ventricular (RV) volumes showed the largest differences, with CMR demonstrating lower interobserver variability (ICC = 0.97 vs. 0.61 for 2D-TTE) and markedly larger volumes (RVEDV mean bias = 74.8 ml, r = 0.50, p < 0.001).
conclusionIn a large general population, CMR quantifies cardiac function and dimensions more reliably than TTE. Both modalities provide significantly different absolute values, limiting intertechnique transferability.
trial registrationRetrospectively registered at ClinicalTrial.gov, registration number: NCT03934957, registration date: 04/01/2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03934957 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40353872What 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.