Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42251966›Full record

ArticleJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2026

Field strength dependence, physiologic correlates, and prognostic significance of ventricular blood pool T2 mapping on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.

Moran Drucker Iarovich, Fadi Ibrahim, Joao Francisco Matos, Nilushi de Silva, William Holden Lowes, Yasbanoo Moayedi, Paaladinesh Thavendiranathan, Tilman Emrich, Akos Varga-Szemes, Kate Hanneman

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 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

10 authors.

Moran Drucker IarovichJoint Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Medical Imaging, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Fadi IbrahimJoint Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Medical Imaging, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Joao Francisco MatosJoint Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Medical Imaging, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Nilushi de SilvaDivision of Cardiology, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
William Holden LowesDivision of Cardiology, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Yasbanoo MoayediDivision of Cardiology, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Paaladinesh ThavendiranathanJoint Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Medical Imaging, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Division of Cardiology, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Tilman EmrichDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Langenbeckst, Mainz, Germany; German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Rhine-Main, Mainz, Germany; Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Akos Varga-SzemesDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Kate HannemanJoint Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network (UHN), University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Medical Imaging, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Electronic address: kate.hanneman@uhn.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeCardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) T2 mapping is sensitive to blood oxygenation. The purpose was to evaluate determinants of the right-to-left ventricular (RV/LV) blood pool (BP) T2 ratio, determine field strength-specific cut-points for prediction of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and assess physiologic correlates.

methodsAdults undergoing CMR (at 1.5T or 3T) for evaluation of cardiomyopathy between 2018 and 2020 were retrospectively evaluated along with healthy controls. RV and LV BP T2 values were measured on a mid-ventricular short-axis T2 map with calculation of the RV/LV BP T2 ratio. Reproducibility was assessed in a random subset of 100 patients. Associations with cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) parameters and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were evaluated using Spearman correlation, Cox regression, and receiver operating characteristic analysis.

resultsA total of 718 subjects were included: 678 with cardiomyopathy (mean age 50±16 years; 58% men) and 40 controls (mean age 45±15 years; 55% men). Over a median follow-up of 3.2 years (IQR 2.3-3.8), 53 patients experienced MACE. RV/LV BP T2 ratios were 18%-31% higher at 1.5T versus 3T (cardiomyopathy: 0.77±0.14 vs 0.59±0.13, p<0.001; controls: 0.79±0.11 vs 0.67±0.09, p<0.001) with excellent reproducibility (intra-observer ICC 0.96 and inter-observer ICC 0.95). Each 0.1-unit decrease in RV/LV BP T2 ratio was associated with 41%-42% increased hazard of MACE in multivariable analysis (HR 0.59, 95%CI 0.45, 0.78, p<0.001 at 1.5T and HR 0.58, 95%CI 0.40, 0.85, p=0.005 at 3T). Optimal cut-points for prediction of MACE were <0.70 at 1.5T (AUC 0.727) and <0.55 at 3T (AUC 0.689). Absolute RV BP T2 demonstrated similar prognostic performance. Among patients with CPET (n=150), lower RV/LV BP T2 ratios correlated significantly with reduced percent-predicted oxygen uptake (VO

conclusionsThe RV/LV BP T2 ratio reflects clinically meaningful cardiopulmonary physiology and independently predicts MACE, but is strongly influenced by MRI field strength, challenging assumptions of inherent field-independence and necessitating field strength-specific thresholds. Absolute RV BP T2 demonstrated comparable prognostic performance and may serve as a practical complementary metric. These findings establish RV BP T2 metrics as promising biomarkers for improved risk stratification in clinical CMR.

Indexed as

Blood oxygenationCardiomyopathyCardiovascular magnetic resonancemagnetic resonance imaging (MRI)parametric mappingT2 mapping

Identifiers

PMID42251966
PMCPMC13292778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.