ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2025
Multiparametric quantitative structural and functional cardiac MRI in orthotopic heart transplant recipients with cardiac allograft vasculopathy.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2025. 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.
- Non-invasive imaging in heart transplant recipients: state of art and future direction.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to verify if multiparametric quantitative CMR can detect mild-to-moderate cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) in patients post-orthotopic heart transplant (OHT). 51 patients (age = 50.0 ± 13.6 years, 29% female) post-OHT 0-6 years (mean 3.2 ± 1.5 years) who underwent CMR from 2011 to 2019 were retrospectively included. Multiparametric CMR included CINE imaging covering the left ventricle (LV), pre- and post-contrast T1 mapping, and T2 mapping, extracellular volume fraction (ECV) calculation, and 2D-feature tracking strain. CAV0 ('CAV negative') patient variables were compared with CAV1-CAV2 ('CAV positive') variables. Logistic regression was used to determine predictors of CAV status. Myocardial T2 was higher in CAV positive compared with CAV negative patients (54.5 ± 7.7 ms vs. 50.2 ± 3.3 ms, p < 0.05), as was ECV (31.3 ± 5.3% vs. 27.4 ± 4.1%, p < 0.05). Radial and circumferential peak systolic strain rates were attenuated in CAV positive vs. CAV negative patients (radial: 1.4 ± 0.4 s-1 vs. 1.8 ± 0.3 s-1, circumferential: -0.9 ± 0.2 s-1 vs. -1.1 ± 0.1 s-1, p < 0.05),as well as circumferential and longitudinal peak diastolic strain rates (0.7 ± 0.7 s-1 vs. 1.0 ± 0.5 s-1, and 0.8 ± 0.3 s-1 vs. 0.9 ± 0.3 s-1, p < 0.05, respectively). CAV positive vs. negative status correlated with ECV (rho 0.41, P < 0.01), T2 (rho 0.29, p < 0.05), radial and circumferential peak systolic strain rate (rho - 0.48, P < 0.01 and rho 0.47, p < 0.001, respectively), and circumferential and longitudinal peak diastolic strain rates (rho - 0.34, p < 0.05 and rho - 0.35, p < 0.01, respectively). Logistic regression revealed that a model including ECV, peak radial and circumferential systolic strain rates and longitudinal diastolic strain rate was significant for distinguishing CAV positive vs. negative status with a receiver operator characteristic area under curve of 0.85 ± 0.06 (CI 0.73-0.97), p < 0.005. A model combining functional (strain) and tissue parameters (ECV) was predictive of CAV status, indicating the potential of multiparametric CMR for non-invasive prediction of CAV status in OHT recipients.
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.