Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41984326›Full record

ArticleMagma (New York, N.Y.)2026

CMR T1 and T2 mapping and extracellular volume quantification in systolic phase produces superior image quality with less motion artifacts and equal mapping values compared to conventional diastolic mapping.

Johanna Federico, Suvi Syväranta, Miia Holmström, Jyri Lommi, Satu Suihko, Ritva Peltomaa, Riitta Koivuniemi, Marjatta Leirisalo-Repo, Juha Peltonen, Touko Kaasalainen and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Magma (New York, N.Y.), 2026. 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

11 authors.

Johanna FedericoRadiology, HUS Diagnostic Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland. johanna.federico@hus.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5811-2556
Suvi SyvärantaRadiology, HUS Diagnostic Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Miia HolmströmRadiology, HUS Diagnostic Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Jyri LommiCardiology, HUS Heart and Lung Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Satu SuihkoCardiology, HUS Heart and Lung Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Ritva PeltomaaRheumatology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Riitta KoivuniemiRheumatology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Marjatta Leirisalo-RepoRheumatology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Juha PeltonenRadiology, HUS Diagnostic Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Touko KaasalainenRadiology, HUS Diagnostic Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Satu VaaraRadiology, HUS Diagnostic Center, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4 Rakennus 1, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis study investigated whether systolic phase imaging improves cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) mapping by reducing artifacts compared with diastolic phase analyses. We evaluated T1 and T2 relaxation times and extracellular volume (ECV) in healthy individuals, early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA), and aortic stenosis (AS) patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 114 participants (54 healthy adults, 30 ERA and 30 AS patients) underwent 1.5 T CMR with T1, T2, and ECV mapping in both diastolic and systolic phases. Imaging artifacts were categorized as minor or major, and inter-observer agreement was assessed for image quality and reproducibility.

resultsSystolic phase mapping significantly reduced minor imaging artifacts across all cohorts (14% vs 5%, p < 0.001 for T1; 5% vs 2%, p < 0.001 for T2 in healthy cohort), particularly in participants with thinner myocardium. Inter-observer agreement assessed in the ERA cohort was excellent, with higher intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for systolic than diastolic mapping, particularly for T2 (0.975 vs 0.867) and ECV (0.951 vs 0.891). Systolic mapping yielded comparable T1 and T2 relaxation times across all cohorts.

conclusionsSystolic mapping provides comparable T1, T2, and ECV values to diastolic mapping, while reducing artifacts, supporting its clinical applicability across diverse patient profiles.

Indexed as

CMRImaging artifactsSystolic mapping

Identifiers

PMID41984326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.