The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of Original and 2018 Lake Louise Criteria for Diagnosis of Acute Myocarditis: Results of a Validation Cohort
Open accessAbstract
Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of the original Lake Louise criteria (LLC) and the 2018 LLC for the diagnosis of acute myocarditis and simultaneously validate previously reported cutoff values for parametric mapping techniques. Materials and Methods A total of 40 patients with acute myocarditis and 26 control participants underwent cardiac MRI. Cardiac MRI protocol allowed for assessment of T2 signal intensity ratio, early gadolinium enhancement ratio, late gadolinium enhancement, T1 relaxation times, extracellular volume fraction, and T2 relaxation times. The original and the 2018 LLC were assessed, and differences between sensitivities and specificities were calculated with the McNemar test. Results The 2018 LLC yielded a sensitivity of 87.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.9%, 94.5%) and a specificity of 96.2% (95% CI: 81.1%, 99.3%). The original LLC had a sensitivity of 72.5% (95% CI: 57.2%, 83.9%) and a specificity of 96.2% (95% CI: 81.1%, 99.3%). Sensitivity of the 2018 LLC was significantly higher compared with the sensitivity of original LLC (P = .031). No differences in specificity were observed between both scores (P = .999) Conclusion Multiparametric cardiac MRI has a high diagnostic value for the diagnosis of patients clinically suspected of having acute myocarditis. The 2018 LLC further improve the diagnostic performance of cardiac MRI by increasing its sensitivity. An implementation of the new score into routine diagnostic protocols should be considered. Keywords: Adults, Cardiac, Cardiomyopathies, Heart, Left Ventricle, MR-Imaging © RSNA, 2019 See also the commentary by Gutberlet and Lücke in this issue. Supplemental material is available for this article.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Nonischemic Myocardial Inflammation
Ferreira, V. M., Schulz-Menger, J., Holmvang, G., Kramer, C. M., Carbone, I., Sechtem, U., Kindermann, I., Gutberlet, M., Cooper, L. T., Liu, P., et al. (2018) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.09.072 · Cited by 2,059
Cited by
Myocarditis and inflammatory cardiomyopathy: current evidence and future directions
Tschöpe, C., Ammirati, E., Bozkurt, B., Caforio, A. L. P., Cooper, L. T., Felix, S. B., Hare, J. M., Heidecker, B., Heymans, S., Hübner, N., et al. (2021) · Nature Reviews Cardiology · doi:10.1038/s41569-020-00435-x · Cited by 1,217
Ammirati, E., Frigerio, M., Adler, E. D., Basso, C., Birnie, D. H., Brambatti, M., Friedrich, M. G., Klingel, K., Lehtonen, J., Moslehi, J. J., et al. (2020) · Circulation: Heart Failure · doi:10.1161/circheartfailure.120.007405 · Cited by 811
Daniels, C. J., Rajpal, S., Greenshields, J. T., Rosenthal, G. L., Chung, E. H., Terrin, M., Jeudy, J., Mattson, S. E., Law, I. H., Borchers, J., et al. (2021) · JAMA Cardiology · doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2021.2065 · Cited by 325
Metadata
- Authors
- Luetkens, J. A., Faron, A., Isaak, A., Dabir, D., Kuetting, D., Feisst, A., Schmeel, F. C., Sprinkart, A. M., & Thomas, D.
- Venue
- Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- e190010
- ISSN
- 2638-6135 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2963818273
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Comparison of Original and 2018 Lake Louise Criteria for Diagnosis of Acute Myocarditis: Results of a Validation Cohort. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/ryct.2019190010
- The paper
- Luetkens, J. A., Faron, A., Isaak, A., Dabir, D., Kuetting, D., Feisst, A., Schmeel, F. C., Sprinkart, A. M., & Thomas, D. (2019). Comparison of Original and 2018 Lake Louise Criteria for Diagnosis of Acute Myocarditis: Results of a Validation Cohort. Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryct.2019190010
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.