ReviewJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2025
Myocardial Fibrosis: Assessment, Quantification, Prognostic Signification, and Anti-Fibrosis Targets: A State-of-the-Art Review.
Review in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeting the aldosterone-mineralocorticoid receptor pathway in cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2026Review
- The Role of the Extracellular Volume of the Infarction Zone and the Remote Myocardium in Predicting Systolic Dysfunction After the First Myocardial Infarction.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Epilepsy-induced heart damage and sudep risk: ion channelopathies, calcium homeostasis, and the therapeutic potential of resveratrol.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Functional Cardiac Biomaterials: Insights into Constructing a Vascularized Myocardial Tissue Surrogate.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2026Review
- Longitudinal Assessment of Cardiac Native T1 in Transfusion-Dependent Thalassemia.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Molecular Mechanisms of Cardiac Fibrosis: A Pathologist's Perspective.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- RNA 5-Methylcytosine Modification in Myocardial Fibrosis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Mechanism and research progress of MAPK signaling pathway in myocardial fibrosis.Frontiers in cardiovascular 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myocardial fibrosis (MF) is the excessive deposition of extracellular matrix (ECM) from myofibroblasts and is crucial in patients with heart failure (HF). Much work is still needed to fully understand its features and clinical role. This review aims to summarize the state-of-the-art of MF knowledge, focusing on assessment, quantification, predictive value, and future therapies. We performed a literature search about MF studies published between 2014 and 2024, including clinical studies on MF assessment or quantification, the role of MF as a prognostic factor in patients with HF, basic science studies on fibrosis assessment, and the role of the main mechanisms involved in MF. We identified 5161 potentially relevant articles. After excluding non-appropriate ones, we had 186 potentially suitable studies. After full reading and a review of references, 40 articles were included in our review: 8 were about MF assessment, 5 about quantification, and 27 about fibrosis as a prognostic factor. MF is a crucial process in patients with cardiac diseases and leads to HF and arrhythmias. Assessment and quantification have taken great steps forward, but more research is needed to strengthen MF's role as a prognostic factor in the future. Basic science will play a key role in anti-fibrosis treatment.
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.