ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2026
Free-Breathing 3D Whole Heart and Aorta Cine MRI Without Contrast Agent-Comparison to Clinical Standard.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe demand for cardiac MRI is increasing with the growing burden of cardiovascular disease. However, conventional protocols require sequential acquisitions for multi-breath-hold 2D cine and 3D MR angiography (MRA), which is time-consuming. In addition, breath-hold 2D cine can be challenging for patients with limited breath-hold capacity. PURPOSE: To further develop and evaluate a free-breathing 3D whole-heart cine MRI technique for simultaneous assessment of cardiac function and aortic anatomy in a single non-contrast acquisition at 1.5 T. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: Twenty-four healthy volunteers (mean age 31.8 ± 9.9 years, 50% female). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES: 1.5 T; A cartesian spiral (CASPR) bSSFP 3D cine, 2D cine and 3D mDixon MRA. ASSESSMENT: Acquisition and reconstruction times were assessed for 3D cine at 2.5 and 2.0 mm. LV mass, LVEF, and RVEF were assessed by two observers (5 and 32 years of experience) and compared with 2D cine. Aortic root and ascending aortic areas were compared with 3D MRA. Image quality was evaluated using blood pool-to-myocardium contrast ratio and endocardial/epicardial edge sharpness. Qualitative image preference was assessed by three observers (5, 32, and 33 years of experience). STATISTICAL TESTS: One-way ANOVA with Tukey post hoc tests and Bland-Altman analysis with paired t-tests were used. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) assessed inter- and intra-observer agreement. p < 0.05 was considered significant.
resultsAcquisition time was 5 min (2.5 mm) and 7 min (2 mm), versus 11 min for 2D cine and 8 min for 3D MRA. Reconstruction time was approximately 5 min. LV mass showed no differences versus 2D cine. LVEF showed small but significant bias (2.5 mm: 1.38%, p = 0.005; 2.0 mm: 1.39%, p < 0.001). RVEF showed no significant differences. Ascending aorta areas showed significant differences (0.28mm DATA
conclusionFree-breathing 3D cine MRI enables operator-independent, time-efficient, and accurate assessment of cardiac function and aortic anatomy in healthy volunteers in a single non-contrast acquisition at 1.5 T, compared to conventional 2D cine and 3D MRA. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.
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.