Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42060780›Full record

ArticleClinical cardiology2026

Quantitative Assessment of Myocardial Perfusion in Physiological and Pathological Hypertrophy Using Myocardial Contrast Echocardiography.

Liu Chunyao, Jiang Ruihan, Li Kai, Lin Mingming, Wang Xiaofan, Lv Qifeng, Song Xiaoxia, Tian Yu, Sun Juanjuan, Sun Pin

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Liu ChunyaoDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9978-0380
Jiang RuihanDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Li KaiDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Lin MingmingDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Wang XiaofanDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Lv QifengDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Song XiaoxiaDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Tian YuDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Sun JuanjuanDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Sun PinDepartment of Cardiac Ultrasound, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.

Funding

Young Scientist Fund of the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University QDFYQN2024117
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo quantitatively evaluate myocardial perfusion levels in patients with physiological and pathological myocardial hypertrophy using myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE), and to investigate the diagnostic value of MCE parameters for differentiating between these conditions.

methodsFrom June 2023 to December 2024, 25 hypertensive patients with myocardial hypertrophy (pathological hypertrophy group), 25 healthy athletes (physiological hypertrophy group), and 25 healthy controls were enrolled. All participants underwent two-dimensional echocardiography and MCE. Myocardial perfusion parameters-peak intensity (A-value), wash-in slope (β-value), and myocardial blood flow (MBF)-were quantified using a 17-segment model. Differences in perfusion parameters were compared, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate diagnostic efficacy.

resultsCompared with controls, the physiological hypertrophy group showed significantly increased peak intensity (A-value) and MBF (p < 0.05), whereas the pathological hypertrophy group exhibited decreased A-value, slope rate (β-value), and MBF (p < 0.05). Intragroup segmental analysis revealed that in pathological hypertrophy, the basal segments had significantly lower A-value and MBF compared to mid and apical segments (p < 0.05). Intermural comparison demonstrated that in both control and physiological hypertrophy groups, the free wall had lower A-value and MBF than the septum (p < 0.05). In contrast, pathological hypertrophy showed reduced A-value but increased β-value in the free wall (p < 0.05). ROC curve analysis identified an optimal cutoff value of A > 8.13 dB (AUC = 0.904) for discriminating exercise-induced physiological hypertrophy from hypertension-induced pathological hypertrophy.

conclusionMCE enables quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion in hypertrophic patients. The A value, reflecting microvascular density, serves as a reliable discriminator between physiological and pathological hypertrophy.

Indexed as

CardiomegalyCoronary CirculationEchocardiographyHypertensionMyocardial Perfusion ImagingMyocardiumAdultCase-Control StudiesContrast MediaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedROC CurveContrast Mediamyocardial contrast echocardiographymyocardial microcirculationpathological hypertrophyphysiological hypertrophy

Identifiers

PMID42060780
PMCPMC13132156

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.