Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 247

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 access
Luetkens, Julian A., Faron, Anton, Isaak, Alexander, Dabir, Darius, Kuetting, Daniel, Feisst, Andreas, Schmeel, Frederic C., Sprinkart, Alois M., Thomas, Daniel·2019·Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging

Abstract

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/ryct.2019190010

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 247

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.