ArticleJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Impact of reconstruction type on late gadolinium enhancement scar quantification at 3-Tesla: Magnitude vs. phase-sensitive inversion recovery.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe identification of myocardial scar using late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is well established, providing diagnostic and prognostic value in both ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies. Phase-sensitive inversion recovery (PSIR) provides more consistent image contrast compared with magnitude (MAG) reconstructions. However, the impact of reconstruction method on scar quantification remains uncertain.
methodsOne-hundred and thirty-six patients from three prospectively enrolled cohorts with chronic myocardial infarction (>3 months post-infarction), representing distinct infarct phenotypes, underwent contrast-enhanced research CMR. LGE images were acquired using either a breath-hold, segmented spoiled gradient-echo or free-breathing, motion-corrected, balanced steady-state free precession sequence. Infarction was quantified on matched, short-axis MAG and PSIR reconstructions using the full-width at half-maximum method, with total infarct size expressed in grams (g) and as percentage of left ventricular mass. The primary analysis compared scar quantification between the two reconstruction methods.
resultsCompared with MAG, PSIR demonstrated significantly higher median scar mass (13.7 g [6.0-25.7] vs. 8.9 g [4.4-16.6], p<0.001) and percentage of left ventricular mass (14.2% [7.5-21.9] vs. 10.6% [5.4-14.2], p<0.001). Inter-method agreement was moderate for both absolute and relative scar mass (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.33, 0.89] and 0.74 [95% CI: 0.20, 0.89], respectively), with a systematic, proportional difference on Bland-Altman analysis, with consistently higher scar mass by PSIR (mean bias: +5.01 ± 5.87 g; limits of agreement: -6.50 to +16.51 g and +4.54 ± 4.62%; limits of agreement: -4.51 to +13.60%).
conclusionQuantification using PSIR yields higher infarct sizes compared with MAG LGE reconstructions. This emphasizes the importance of using a consistent reconstruction method when quantifying scar burden.
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.