ArticleEuropean heart journal. Imaging methods and practice2026
Alterations of right ventricular assessment by use of an ultrasound-enhancing agent during routine visualization of the left ventricle.
Article in European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Chemotherapy-Induced Right Ventricular Dysfunction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Two-dimensional echocardiography remains the primary means of right ventricular (RV) evaluation. This study evaluated effects of ultrasound contrast, employed to improve left ventricular (LV) visualization, on assessment of RV size and function. Methods and results: In 100 consecutive patients where an ultrasound enhancing agent (UEA) was indicated to improve LV visualization, apical 4-chamber (A4C) views were collected before and after contrast injection, maintaining transducer position. For the last 50 subjects, RV-focused (RVF) views were also obtained. Images were presented in random order to four echocardiographers with varying levels of experience. They were tasked with determining which ventricle formed the apex, whether the RV free wall was adequately visualized, assessing RV size and contractility and reporting their confidence level in their readings. In both A4C and RVF views, the LV was less often determined to be apex-forming when UEA was used and RV size assessments moved in the direction of dilated for all readers. Similarly, a determination of reduced RV contractility occurred more often with UEA. Many of these differences were statistically significant. Interestingly, RV free wall visualization was not improved with contrast use. Moreover, reader confidence in interpretation was actually reduced when contrast was employed, with statistically significant differences for all four readers in the A4C view and two readers in the RVF view. Conclusion: Opportunistic evaluation of the RV after employing UEA resulted in significant differences in visual assessment of various RV parameters. Reader confidence in interpretation was not improved when contrast was used.
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.