Literature DB >> 11369688

Noninvasive quantification of left-to-right shunt in pediatric patients: phase-contrast cine magnetic resonance imaging compared with invasive oximetry.

P Beerbaum1, H Körperich, P Barth, H Esdorn, J Gieseke, H Meyer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Blood flow can be quantified noninvasively by phase-contrast cine MRI (PC-MRI) in adults. Little is known about the feasibility of the method in children with congenital heart disease. METHODS AND
RESULTS: In 50 children (mean age 6.2 years, range 1.1 to 17.7 years) with an atrial- or ventricular-level shunt, blood flow rate in the great vessels was determined by PC-MRI, and the ratio of pulmonary to aortic flow (Qp/Qs) was compared with Qp/Qs by oximetry. We found a difference of 2% and a range of -20% to +26% (limits of agreement, mean +/-2 SD). In another 7 children with congenital heart disease but no cardiac shunting (mean age 7.9 years, range 1.3 to 13.5 years), Qp/Qs by PC-MRI was 1.02 (SD +/-0.06). No difference between systemic venous and aortic flow volumes was found (range -17% to +20%, n=37). Blood flow through a secundum atrial septal defect as assessed by PC-MRI (n=24) overestimated the shunt compared with the difference between pulmonary and aortic flows. The mean difference between 3 repeated PC-MRI measurements in each location was 5.3% (SD +/-4.0%, n=522), demonstrating good precision. The interobserver variability was low. The accuracy of PC-MRI was confirmed by in vitro experiments.
CONCLUSIONS: Determination of Qp/Qs by PC-MRI in children is quick, safe, and reliable compared with oximetry. Systemic venous flow can be quantified by PC-MRI, whereas through-plane shunt measurement within an atrial septal defect is inaccurate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11369688     DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.103.20.2476

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  58 in total

1.  Effect of protocol choice on phase contrast cardiac magnetic resonance flow measurement in the ascending aorta: breath-hold and non-breath-hold.

Authors:  Michael A Bolen; Randolph M Setser; Ruvin S Gabriel; Rahul D Renapurkar; Yasmeen Tandon; Michael L Lieber; Milind Y Desai; Scott D Flamm
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-04-22       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 2.  Imaging sequences in cardiovascular magnetic resonance: current role, evolving applications, and technical challenges.

Authors:  El-Sayed H Ibrahim
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-03-25       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  4D phase-contrast flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance: comprehensive quantification and visualization of flow dynamics in atrial septal defect and partial anomalous pulmonary venous return.

Authors:  Israel Valverde; John Simpson; Tobias Schaeffter; Philipp Beerbaum
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 1.655

4.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-05-17       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 5.  ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 expert consensus document on cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents.

Authors:  W Gregory Hundley; David A Bluemke; J Paul Finn; Scott D Flamm; Mark A Fogel; Matthias G Friedrich; Vincent B Ho; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Christopher M Kramer; Warren J Manning; Manesh Patel; Gerald M Pohost; Arthur E Stillman; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 6.  Evaluation of intracardiac shunts with cardiac magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Patrick M Colletti
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.931

7.  Magnetic resonance imaging guided catheterisation for assessment of pulmonary vascular resistance: in vivo validation and clinical application in patients with pulmonary hypertension.

Authors:  T Kuehne; S Yilmaz; I Schulze-Neick; E Wellnhofer; P Ewert; E Nagel; P Lange
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 5.994

8.  The value of magnetic resonance guided cardiac catheterisation.

Authors:  V Muthurangu; R S Razavi
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 5.994

9.  How many versus how much: comprehensive haemodynamic evaluation of partial anomalous pulmonary venous connection by cardiac MRI.

Authors:  Neil Seller; Shi-Joon Yoo; Brian Grant; Lars Grosse-Wortmann
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging: blood flow quantification compared to 2-D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and Doppler echocardiography.

Authors:  Maya Gabbour; Susanne Schnell; Kelly Jarvis; Joshua D Robinson; Michael Markl; Cynthia K Rigsby
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-12-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.