Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41641226›Full record

ArticleComputing in cardiology2025

Comparison of LGE MRI Scar Identification Methods for Atrial Computational Modeling.

Jake A Bergquist, Benjamin Orkild, Eugene Kwan, Karli Gillette, Kyoichiro Yazaki, Surachat Jaroonpipatkul, Ed Dibella, Rich Shelton, Erik Beiging, Lowell Chang and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computing in cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Jake A BergquistScientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Benjamin OrkildScientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Eugene KwanNora Eccles Cardiovascular Research and Training Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Karli GilletteScientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Kyoichiro YazakiNora Eccles Cardiovascular Research and Training Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Surachat JaroonpipatkulNora Eccles Cardiovascular Research and Training Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Ed DibellaDepartment of Radiology & Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Rich SheltonVeteran's Affairs, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Erik BeigingVeteran's Affairs, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Lowell ChangVeteran's Affairs, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Gernot PlankDivision of Biophysics and Medical Physics, Gottfried Schatz Research Center, Medical University of Graz, Austria.
Shireen ElhabianScientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Rob S MacLeodScientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.
Ravi RanjanNora Eccles Cardiovascular Research and Training Institute, University of Utah, SLC, UT, USA.

Funding

TRD - VisualizationP41GM103545 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI JURRUS, ELIZABETH · 2012 to 2019
$9.7M
Center for Integrative Biomedical Computing Legacy TransitionR24GM136986 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI JOHNSON, CHRISTOPHER R., MACLEOD, ROB S. · 2020 to 2022
$1.6M
Integration of Uncertainty Quantification with SCIRun Bioelectric Field Simulation PipelineU24EB029012 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI MACLEOD, ROB S. · 2019 to 2021
$1.1M
CSRD VA I01 CX002758NIBIB NIH HHS U24 EB029012NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM103545NIGMS NIH HHS R24 GM136986
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identification of patient-specific scar and fibrosis is a critical step in the personalization of cardiac computational models. Late gadolinium enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (LGE-cMRI) is often used to identify patient anatomy, as well as tissue fibrosis and scar. Automated methods to identify scar from LGE-cMRI exist. Still, there is no clear consensus as to which is best in the context of patient-specific computational modeling of atrial fibrillation. There has been no substantial investigation into the effects that variability in scar may have on downstream patient-specific simulations. This study compares the distribution of scar patterns generated via automated LGE-cMRI analysis alongside human-guided scar identification. We assess the effects each identified scar pattern has on downstream computational modeling outputs by comparing the number of stable re-entrant arrhythmias induced In Silico in atrial fibrillation. We find both substantial disagreement between scar patterns identified via automated and human-guided methods, as well as sensitivity in the arrhythmia simulation outcomes across scar patterns. These results highlight the sensitivity of such computational models to these input parameters and enforce the need for robust personalization tools in the cardiac modeling field.

Identifiers

PMID41641226
PMCPMC12867100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.