PURPOSE: To develop high temporal resolution coronary artery spiral phase velocity mapping sequences and to compare the results obtained with those from FLASH sequences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Velocity curves were obtained in eight left and eight right coronary arteries using breath-hold interleaved spiral (BH_SP), free-breathing interleaved spiral (FB_SP), breath-hold segmented FLASH (BH_FL), and free-breathing FLASH (FB_FL) sequences. Spatial resolution, temporal resolution, and acquisition durations (cardiac cycles) were as follows-BH_SP: 0.9 mm x 0.9 mm, 30 msec, 20 cycles; FB_SP: 0.9 mm x 0.9 mm, 42 msec, 100 cycles; BH_FL: 0.9 mm x 1.8 mm, 70 msec (effective), 20 cycles; FB_FL: 0.9 mm x 1.8 mm, 30 msec, 480 cycles. Peak systolic, peak diastolic, and mean velocities were compared between sequences. RESULTS: For left and right arteries, the FB_SP velocity profiles closely followed those from the FB_FL sequence. By comparison, the BH_FL sequence failed to resolve the sharp peaks in the temporal velocity profiles of the right coronary artery, significantly underestimating the peak systolic (88 mm/second vs. 252 mm/second, P < 0.001), peak diastolic (114 mm/second vs. 153 mm/second, P < 0.01), and mean (56 mm/second vs. 93 mm/second, P < 0.001) velocities. For the less mobile left artery, the peak systolic, peak diastolic, and mean velocities were also underestimated by the BH_FL sequence, although this only reached statistical significance for the systolic peak (80 mm/second vs. 135 mm/second, P < 0.01), 142 mm/second vs. 168 mm/second, (P = ns), and 87 mm/second vs. 101 mm/second, (P = ns) respectively. CONCLUSION: We have shown that the FB_SP sequence developed agrees well with the FB_FL sequence, while the study duration is reduced by a factor of 10 for the same spatial resolution. By comparison, the BH_FL sequence underestimates flow velocities, particularly in the more mobile right coronary artery. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PURPOSE: To develop high temporal resolution coronary artery spiral phase velocity mapping sequences and to compare the results obtained with those from FLASH sequences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Velocity curves were obtained in eight left and eight right coronary arteries using breath-hold interleaved spiral (BH_SP), free-breathing interleaved spiral (FB_SP), breath-hold segmented FLASH (BH_FL), and free-breathing FLASH (FB_FL) sequences. Spatial resolution, temporal resolution, and acquisition durations (cardiac cycles) were as follows-BH_SP: 0.9 mm x 0.9 mm, 30 msec, 20 cycles; FB_SP: 0.9 mm x 0.9 mm, 42 msec, 100 cycles; BH_FL: 0.9 mm x 1.8 mm, 70 msec (effective), 20 cycles; FB_FL: 0.9 mm x 1.8 mm, 30 msec, 480 cycles. Peak systolic, peak diastolic, and mean velocities were compared between sequences. RESULTS: For left and right arteries, the FB_SP velocity profiles closely followed those from the FB_FL sequence. By comparison, the BH_FL sequence failed to resolve the sharp peaks in the temporal velocity profiles of the right coronary artery, significantly underestimating the peak systolic (88 mm/second vs. 252 mm/second, P < 0.001), peak diastolic (114 mm/second vs. 153 mm/second, P < 0.01), and mean (56 mm/second vs. 93 mm/second, P < 0.001) velocities. For the less mobile left artery, the peak systolic, peak diastolic, and mean velocities were also underestimated by the BH_FL sequence, although this only reached statistical significance for the systolic peak (80 mm/second vs. 135 mm/second, P < 0.01), 142 mm/second vs. 168 mm/second, (P = ns), and 87 mm/second vs. 101 mm/second, (P = ns) respectively. CONCLUSION: We have shown that the FB_SP sequence developed agrees well with the FB_FL sequence, while the study duration is reduced by a factor of 10 for the same spatial resolution. By comparison, the BH_FL sequence underestimates flow velocities, particularly in the more mobile right coronary artery. Copyright 2003 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: Anne Brandts; Stijntje D Roes; Joost Doornbos; Robert G Weiss; Albert de Roos; Matthias Stuber; Jos J M Westenberg Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Willem G van Dockum; Paul Knaapen; Mark B M Hofman; Joost P A Kuijer; Folkert J ten Cate; Jurrien M ten Berg; Aernout M Beek; Jos W R Twisk; Albert C van Rossum Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-02-22 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: M Markl; S Schnell; C Wu; E Bollache; K Jarvis; A J Barker; J D Robinson; C K Rigsby Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Jennifer Keegan; Claire E Raphael; Kim Parker; Robin M Simpson; Stephen Strain; Ranil de Silva; Carlo Di Mario; Julian Collinson; Rod H Stables; Ricardo Wage; Peter Drivas; Malindie Sugathapala; Sanjay K Prasad; David N Firmin Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2015-10-02 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Krishna S Nayak; Jon-Fredrik Nielsen; Matt A Bernstein; Michael Markl; Peter D Gatehouse; Rene M Botnar; David Saloner; Christine Lorenz; Han Wen; Bob S Hu; Frederick H Epstein; John N Oshinski; Subha V Raman Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2015-08-09 Impact factor: 5.364