ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Reproducibility of late gadolinium enhancement quantification techniques in ischemic and non-ischemic heart diseases (ReLate study).
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal Characterization of Atrial Fibrillation: From Patient-Specific Anatomy and Electrophysiology to Standardized Atrial Mapping.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Review
- Prognostic significance of artificial intelligence-quantified late gadolinium enhancement on cardiac magnetic resonance in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Visual standardized quantification of late gadolinium enhancement, a contour-less method for late gadolinium enhancement quantification.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026Article
- Analysis of the Accuracy and Inter-Reader Precision of Scar Quantification Techniques in Aortic Stenosis: A Comparative Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is an established metric for risk stratification and therapeutic guidance. However, consensus on the optimal technique for quantifying left ventricular (LV) LGE extent remains lacking. This study aimed to identify the most reliable method for quantifying LGE in chronic myocardial infarction (CMI), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), and inflammatory heart disease (IHD). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 285 prospectively enrolled patients (CMI: Results: In CMI, FWHM demonstrated the highest reproducibility, with a mean difference of 0.47% (95% CI: -0.40 to 1.35). In HCM, both the 5-SD and 6-SD techniques showed the highest reproducibility, with mean differences of 0.06% (95% CI: -1.28 to 1.39) and -0.16% (95% CI: -1.50 to 1.17), respectively. In IHD, the 5-SD and 6-SD techniques achieved the highest reproducibility, with mean differences of -0.72% (95% CI: -1.54 to 0.11) and -0.71% (95% CI: -1.54 to 0.11). Conclusion: The distribution and pattern of LGE influence the reproducibility of its quantification. FWHM provided the highest intra-observer reproducibility for sharply demarcated scars, as seen in CMI. For more diffuse fibrosis patterns, such as in HCM and IHD, both the 5-SD and 6-SD techniques offered similarly reproducible performance.
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.