ACR Clinical Statement on Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging

Weinreb, Jeffrey C.; Larson, Paul A.; Woodard, Pamela K.; Stanford, William; Rubin, Geoffrey D.; Stillman, Arthur E.; Bluemke, David A.; Duerinckx, André J.; Dunnick, N. Reed; Smith, Geoffrey G.

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2005.03.001

Cited by 21 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Note also the lesion in the first obtuse marginal with poststenotic dilatation (d) reserved for smaller patients, dramatic dose reductions can be achieved with 100 kV acquisition. Our patient population (17/40 patients with BMI [ 30 kg/m 2 ) is generally not well suited for 100 kV imaging, but this strategy should be considered when possible, in keeping with the ''as low as reasonably achievable'' (ALARA) principle [47].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography

Rybicki

Otero

Steigner

et al. 2008

Int J Cardiovasc Imaging

527

335

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Initial evaluation of coronary images from 320-detector row computed tomography

Rybicki

Otero

Steigner

et al. 2008

Int J Cardiovasc Imaging

527

335

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians have always been associated with advances and innovations in CV imaging and introduction of new techniques for the clinical management of patients with heart diseases [14][15][16]. Although numerous CV imaging modalities, such as echocardiography, angiocardiography, and coronary angiography, have been developed by radiologists, there was a progressive reduction of the role of radiologists in this field as these have been increasingly or exclusively performed by cardiologists [17,18]. Reasons for this include the fact that they are charged with clinical management of the patients, while radiologists rarely have direct access or interactions with patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The constant increase in clinical use of cardiac MRI over the decades has led to a real conflict between radiologists and cardiologists over who should be performing and interpreting these procedures [6,17]. In parallel with the expanded number of MRI scans performed, the volume of scientific production has been continuously increasing [10,11,30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The cardiac conundrum: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis of authorship in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging studies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: We aimed to assess the role of radiologists, cardiologists, and other medical and non-medical figures in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) research in the last 34 years, focusing on first and last authorship, number of published studies, and journal impact factors (IF). Methods: Articles in the field of cardiac MRI were considered in this systematic review and retrospective bibliometric analysis. For included studies, the first and last authors were categorized as cardiologists, radiologists/ nuclear medicine physicians, medical doctors (MD) with specialties in both cardiology and radiology/nuclear medicine, and other MD and non-MD. Differences in the number of papers published overall and by year and institution location for the first and last author category were assessed. Mean IF differences between author categories were also investigated. Results: A total of 2053 articles were included in the final analysis. For the first authors (n = 2011), 52% were cardiologists, 22% radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians, 16% other MD, 10% other non-MD, and 1% both cardiologists and radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians. Similarly, the last authors (n = 2029) resulted 54% cardiologists, 22% radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians, 15% other MD, 8% other non-MD, and 2% both cardiologists and radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians. No significant differences due to institution location in the first and last authorship proportions were found. Average journal IF was significantly higher for cardiologist first and last authors when compared to that of radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians (both p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Over 50% of studies in the field of cardiac MRI published in the last 34 years are conducted by cardiologists.

show abstract

“…For standardization of CMR certification, dedicated teaching systems have been defined by various societies. In particular, guidelines for basic and advanced CMR levels were established by several radiology (ie, ACR), cardiology (ie, European Society of Cardiology), and interdisciplinary societies (ie, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Imaging [SCMR]) [7][8][9][10]. These guidelines require a multimodal teaching system with lectures, seminars, and case studies covering all CMR indications, as well as a dedicated teaching center providing the necessary volume of CMR scans.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%