↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of acute myocarditis by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: Comparison of qualitative and quantitative analysis methods

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of acute myocarditis by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: Comparison of qualitative and quantitative analysis methods
Published in
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12350-017-1109-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Massimo Imbriaco, Carmela Nappi, Marta Puglia, Marco De Giorgi, Serena Dell'Aversana, Renato Cuocolo, Andrea Ponsiglione, Igino De Giorgi, Maria Vincenza Polito, Michele Klain, Federico Piscione, Leonardo Pace, Alberto Cuocolo

Abstract

To compare cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) qualitative and quantitative analysis methods for the noninvasive assessment of myocardial inflammation in patients with suspected acute myocarditis (AM). A total of 61 patients with suspected AM underwent coronary angiography and CMR. Qualitative analysis was performed applying Lake-Louise Criteria (LLC), followed by quantitative analysis based on the evaluation of edema ratio (ER) and global relative enhancement (RE). Diagnostic performance was assessed for each method by measuring the area under the curves (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic analyses. The final diagnosis of AM was based on symptoms and signs suggestive of cardiac disease, evidence of myocardial injury as defined by electrocardiogram changes, elevated troponin I, exclusion of coronary artery disease by coronary angiography, and clinical and echocardiographic follow-up at 3 months after admission to the chest pain unit. In all patients, coronary angiography did not show significant coronary artery stenosis. Troponin I levels and creatine kinase were higher in patients with AM compared to those without (both P < .001). There were no significant differences among LLC, T2-weighted short inversion time inversion recovery (STIR) sequences, early (EGE), and late (LGE) gadolinium-enhancement sequences for diagnosis of AM. The AUC for qualitative (T2-weighted STIR 0.92, EGE 0.87 and LGE 0.88) and quantitative (ER 0.89 and global RE 0.80) analyses were also similar. Qualitative and quantitative CMR analysis methods show similar diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis of AM. These findings suggest that a simplified approach using a shortened CMR protocol including only T2-weighted STIR sequences might be useful to rule out AM in patients with acute coronary syndrome and normal coronary angiography.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Professor 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 52%
Psychology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Unknown 9 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 22 August 2020.
All research outputs
#7,000,448
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#449
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,991
of 338,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#10
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 338,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.