ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2026
Effect of echocardiographic imaging view and methods on left ventricular wall-thickness measurements in normal cats and cats with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEchocardiographic measurements of left ventricular free wall (LVFW) and interventricular septum (IVS) thickness are essential for diagnosing hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). HYPOTHESIS/
objectivesTo evaluate agreement between different imaging views and modes for assessing LV wall thickness in cats. We hypothesized that there is clinically relevant bias between methods, and that results cannot be used interchangeably. ANIMALS: Two-hundred eighty cats; 140 controls and 140 with subclinical HCM.
methodsRetrospective, single-center, and cross-sectional study. End-diastolic IVS and LVFW thickness was evaluated by 2-dimensional (2D) and time-motion mode (M-mode) echocardiography, from right parasternal long-axis (RPLax) and right parasternal short-axis (RPSax) views: method-1 (M1), RPLax using 2D; M2, RPLax using M-mode; M3, RPSax using 2D; and M4, RPSax using M-mode. Using 2D images, the thickest portion of the LV wall was measured. Methods were compared using repeated measurement ANOVA on ranks and the Bland-Altman method with bias and 95% limits of agreement (95% LOA).
resultsIn controls, IVS thickness was not different among the 4 methods (P = .67; bias 0.04-0.10 mm, 95% LOA -1.09 to 1.28 mm); whereas LVFW thickness was (P < .001) using M-mode compared to 2D (bias 0.22-0.30 mm; 95% LOA -0.81 to 1.25 mm). In HCM cats, thickness of the IVS (bias -1.07 to -1.13 mm; 95% LOA -3.05 to 0.84 mm) and LVFW (bias 0.22 to -.27 mm; 95% LOA -2.09 to 2.03 mm) was different among methods (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Two-dimensional and M-mode echocardiographic methods in the assessment of LV wall thickness cannot be used interchangeably, particularly in cats with HCM.
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.