↓ Skip to main content

Incidental findings in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: superiority of bSSFP over T1w-HASTE for extra-cardiac findings assessment

Overview of attention for article published in The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
Incidental findings in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: superiority of bSSFP over T1w-HASTE for extra-cardiac findings assessment
Published in
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10554-017-1145-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jan M. Sohns, Jan Menke, Alexander Schwarz, Leonard Bergau, Johannes T. Kowallick, Andreas Schuster, Frank Konietschke, Marius Placzek, Desiree Weiberg, Stefan Nordlohne, Sebastian Schmuck, Sebastian Schulz, Thorsten Derlin, Wieland Staab

Abstract

Incidental findings are frequent in radiological examinations and may have an impact on further patient management. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze, which of two thoracic scout sequences is more suitable for detecting incidental extra-cardiac findings at cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) with stress perfusion. During a 14-month period clinically indicated stress perfusion CMRI was performed in 97 consecutive patients. For anatomical orientation ECG-triggered (electrocardiography) T1w-Half-fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE) and balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) sequences were performed for planning the standard cardiac sequences. Two radiologists independently studied incidental extra-cardiac findings with both sequences and rated the diagnostic confidence of the sequences for this assessment using a multinomial model. Furthermore, the interobserver agreement between the observers was assessed by weighted kappa statistics. Eight patients without incidental findings were excluded. In the other 89 patients a total of 153 incidental extra-cardiac findings were observed. Overall, 47.1% of findings were seen with better diagnostic confidence at bSSFP as opposed to 20.6% at T1w-HASTE. 32.4% of findings were equally well seen with both sequences. Consequently the bSSFP sequence was significantly better in terms of diagnostic confidence for detecting the majority of extra-cardiac incidental findings (P < 0.01), whereas a minority of findings was better visible by the HASTE sequence. The weighted kappa statistics was 0.85, indicating good interobserver agreement. Compared with T1w-HASTE, the bSSFP sequence improved the visibility of incidental extra-cardiac findings at stress perfusion CMRI. While all findings were seen on both sequences, bSSFP resulted in improved diagnostic confidence, and the T1w-HASTE sequence provided complementary diagnostic information in only a minority of patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Student > Master 1 10%
Unknown 7 70%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 1 10%
Unknown 9 90%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2017.
All research outputs
#17,239,390
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#908
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,806
of 323,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#26
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,433 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.