PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of acquisition parameters on the accuracy of 2D velocity encoded cine magnetic resonance imaging (VEC MRI) flow measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a pulsatile flow phantom, through-plane flow measurements were performed on a flexible vessel made of polyvinyl alcohol cryogel (PVA), a material that mimics the MR signal and biomechanical properties of aortic tissue. RESULTS: Repeated VEC MRI flow measurements (N = 20) under baseline conditions yielded an error of 0.8 +/- 1.5%. Slice thickness, angle between flow and velocity encoding directions, spatial resolution, velocity encoding range, and radio frequency (RF) flip angles were varied over a clinically relevant range. Spatial resolution had the greatest impact on accuracy, with a 9% overestimation of flow at 16 pixels per vessel cross-section. CONCLUSION: VEC MRI proved to be an accurate and reproducible technique for pulsatile flow measurements over the range of acquisition parameters examined as long as sufficient spatial resolution was prescribed. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of acquisition parameters on the accuracy of 2D velocity encoded cine magnetic resonance imaging (VEC MRI) flow measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a pulsatile flow phantom, through-plane flow measurements were performed on a flexible vessel made of polyvinyl alcohol cryogel (PVA), a material that mimics the MR signal and biomechanical properties of aortic tissue. RESULTS: Repeated VEC MRI flow measurements (N = 20) under baseline conditions yielded an error of 0.8 +/- 1.5%. Slice thickness, angle between flow and velocity encoding directions, spatial resolution, velocity encoding range, and radio frequency (RF) flip angles were varied over a clinically relevant range. Spatial resolution had the greatest impact on accuracy, with a 9% overestimation of flow at 16 pixels per vessel cross-section. CONCLUSION: VEC MRI proved to be an accurate and reproducible technique for pulsatile flow measurements over the range of acquisition parameters examined as long as sufficient spatial resolution was prescribed. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Peter D Gatehouse; Jennifer Keegan; Lindsey A Crowe; Sharmeen Masood; Raad H Mohiaddin; Karl-Friedrich Kreitner; David N Firmin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-07-08 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Yimin Shen; Yu-Chung N Cheng; Gavin Lawes; Jaladhar Neelavalli; Chandran Sudakar; Ronald Tackett; Hari P Ramnath; E Mark Haacke Journal: MAGMA Date: 2008-08-29 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Marcus R Makowski; Andrea J Wiethoff; Hans U Ebersberger; René M Botnar; Reza Razavi; Tobias Schaeffter; Gerald F Greil Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-11-11 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Kevin S Roman; Christian J Kellenberger; Saqba Farooq; Christopher K MacGowan; David L Gilday; Shi-Joon Yoo Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2004-10-15
Authors: Emanuela R Valsangiacomo; Catherine Barrea; Christopher K Macgowan; Jeffrey F Smallhorn; John G Coles; Shi-Joon Yoo Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2003-07-15
Authors: Kevin K Whitehead; Matthew J Gillespie; Matthew A Harris; Mark A Fogel; Jonathan J Rome Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-07-08 Impact factor: 7.792