Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 215

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Endocardial Trabeculae on Left Ventricular Measurements and Measurement Reproducibility at Cardiovascular MR Imaging

Papavassiliu, Theano, Kühl, Harald P., Schröder, Meike, Süselbeck, Tim, Bondarenko, Olga, Böhm, Christoph K., Beek, Aernout, Hofman, Mark M. B., van Rossum, Albert C.·2005·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively assess the effect of including or excluding endocardial trabeculae in left ventricular (LV) measurements and the reproducibility of these measurements at cine cardiovascular magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with true fast imaging with steady-state precession (FISP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the local ethics committee, and each subject gave informed consent before participating. Twenty healthy subjects and 20 consecutive patients underwent 1.5-T cardiovascular MR imaging. Seven to 12 short-axis views encompassing the entire LV were acquired by using true FISP. Endocardial and epicardial contours were traced manually. The data sets in each patient were analyzed twice: with inclusion of endocardial trabeculae in the LV cavity volume and with exclusion of endocardial trabeculae from the cavity volume. On the basis of these two contour sets, the end-diastolic (ED) and end-systolic (ES) LV volumes, ejection fraction (EF), and LV mass were calculated. Additionally, interobserver and interexamination reproducibility was assessed by using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Compared with exclusion of trabeculae, inclusion of trabeculae in the LV cavity volume resulted in significantly larger ED and ES LV volumes (mean differences, 21 mL +/- 11 [standard deviation] and 19 mL +/- 33, respectively; P < .001) and lower EFs (mean difference, -2% +/- 2; P < .001). The calculated LV mass was significantly smaller with inclusion than with exclusion of trabeculae (mean difference, -21 g +/- 12; P < .001). All interobserver and interexamination limits of agreement based on inclusion of trabeculae, except those for EF measurements, were superior to those based on exclusion of trabeculae. At measurement reproducibility comparisons, differences in interobserver ED LV volume and LV mass and interexamination LV mass were statistically significant, favoring the inclusion of trabeculae in the LV cavity volume. CONCLUSION: Trabeculae significantly affect quantifications of LV volume and mass. The superior reproducibility of LV measurements with the inclusion of endocardial trabeculae in the cavity volume favors this tracing algorithm for clinical use.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2353040601

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 215

Metadata

Authors
Papavassiliu, T., Kühl, H. P., Schröder, M., Süselbeck, T., Bondarenko, O., Böhm, C. K., Beek, A., Hofman, M. M. B., & van Rossum, A. C.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2005-07
Volume
236
Issue
1
Pages
57-64
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2102703007
Cited by
215
References
2
FWCI
6.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of Endocardial Trabeculae on Left Ventricular Measurements and Measurement Reproducibility at Cardiovascular MR Imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2353040601
The paper
Papavassiliu, T., Kühl, H. P., Schröder, M., Süselbeck, T., Bondarenko, O., Böhm, C. K., Beek, A., Hofman, M. M. B., & van Rossum, A. C. (2005). Effect of Endocardial Trabeculae on Left Ventricular Measurements and Measurement Reproducibility at Cardiovascular MR Imaging. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2353040601

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.