ArticleJACC. Cardiovascular imaging2025
Detecting Hemorrhagic Myocardial Infarction With 3.0-T CMR: Insights Into Spatial Manifestation, Time-Dependence, and Optimal Acquisitions.
Article in JACC. Cardiovascular imaging, 2025. 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHemorrhagic myocardial infarction (hMI) can rapidly diminish the benefits of reperfusion therapy and direct the heart toward chronic heart failure. T2∗ cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is the reference standard for detecting hMI. However, the lack of clarity around the earliest time point for detection, time-dependent changes in hemorrhage volume, and the optimal methods for detection can limit the development of strategies to manage hMI.
objectivesThe authors investigated CMR signal characteristics of hMI through time-lapse multiparametric mapping using a clinically relevant animal model and evaluated the translatability in ST-segment elevation MI patients when possible.
methodsCanines (N = 20) underwent 3.0-T CMR at baseline and various time points over the first week of reperfused MI. Time-dependent relationships between T1, T2, and T2∗ mapping of hMI, non-hMI, and remote territories were determined. Reperfused ST-segment elevation MI patients (N = 50) were studied to establish clinically feasibility.
resultsAlthough hMI was evident <1 hour after reperfusion on histopathology, it was not reliably detected with T1, T2, or T2∗ CMR. However, 24 hours to 7 days postreperfusion, hMI was detectable on T2∗ (27.0 ± 2.4 ms [baseline] vs 11.7 ± 2.8 ms [hMI]; P < 0.001), with stable volume and transmurality. In T2 maps, hMI was most visible 5 to 7 days postreperfusion with an area under the curve of 0.98 (sensitivity and specificity ≥0.95) relative to T2∗. However, this was not the case with T1 (sensitivity <0.8, across all time points).
conclusionsHMI cannot be reliably detected with T1, T2, or T2∗ on 3.0-T CMR immediately after reperfusion. However, T2∗ CMR can be used to diagnose hMI between 24 hours and 7 days postreperfusion. T2 maps at 3.0-T are a strong alternative to T2∗ maps for diagnosing hMI, provided CMR is performed 5 to 7 days postreperfusion. However, diagnosing hMI with T1 is significantly more challenging at 3.0-T compared with both T2∗ and T2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.