ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2026
Left ventricular wall thickness in cats: agreement between echocardiographic views.
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVarious echocardiographic views are used to assess left ventricular wall thickness (LVWT), but whether these measurements are interchangeable remains unclear. HYPOTHESIS/
objectivesTo assess agreement of LVWT measurements between different echocardiographic views and techniques in cats. ANIMALS: Four hundred eight cats: 292 with maximal LVWT (MaxLVWTd) < 6 mm and 116 with MaxLVWTd ≥6 mm.
methodsCross-sectional study. Echocardiograms performed and measured by a single observer. Septal and free wall LVWT were measured using 2-dimensional (2D) right parasternal long-axis (RPLA) 4- and 5-chamber views, 2D short-axis (RPSA), and M-mode RPSA views. Bland-Altman analysis assessed agreement between views.
resultsSeptal thickness (4.6 mm [range, 2.9-9.5] vs 4.2 mm [range, 2.8-9.2], P < .0001) and free wall thickness (4.6 mm [range, 3.0-11.1] vs. 4.1 mm [range, 2.4-12.3]; P < .0001) were significantly greater in 2D RPLA than 2D RPSA. Agreement between 2D RPLA and 2D RPSA showed wide limits of agreement (LoA) and heteroscedasticity for septal and free wall measurements. Between 2D RPSA and M-mode RPSA, a small bias was noted for septal thickness (-0.04 mm, 95%, -0.12 to 0.04 mm), but LoA remained wide (-1.1 to 1.1 mm). Agreement between 4- and 5-chamber 2D RPLA showed small biases (septum: -0.09 mm, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.04 mm; free wall: -0.03 mm, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.02), with wide LoA (septum: -0.8 to 0.7 mm; free wall: -0.9 to 0.8 mm). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: LVWT measurements vary significantly across echocardiographic views and are not interchangeable. Standardized measurement protocols are needed to improve consistency in cardiac phenotyping.
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.