Literature DB >> 15690511

Analysis and correction of gradient nonlinearity and B0 inhomogeneity related scaling errors in two-dimensional phase contrast flow measurements.

Johannes M Peeters1, Clemens Bos, Chris J G Bakker.   

Abstract

Phase contrast flow measurements will be increasingly biased at eccentric positions, where nonlinearity of gradients and inhomogeneity of the main field become important. In theory, they scale the result of phase contrast flow values in two ways: incorrect velocity encoding of moving spins and geometric distortion of the vessel cross-sectional area. A flow phantom, consisting of a 3D grid of interconnected tubes, was used to determine the spatial dependence of the associated scaling factors, which demonstrate that scaling errors in flow can be as large as 20% within the examined volume of 336 x 336 x 336 mm(3). The same phantom was also used to determine and minimize concomitant gradient effects. Correction of the off-center flow values with the local scaling factors and the concomitant gradient phase improves the measurement accuracy substantially, both in the flow phantom and in a volunteer study. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15690511     DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20309

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Med        ISSN: 0740-3194            Impact factor:   4.668


  8 in total

Review 1.  Clinical Applications of MRA 4D-Flow.

Authors:  Lilia M Sierra-Galan; Christopher J François
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-09-10

2.  Influence of eddy current, Maxwell and gradient field corrections on 3D flow visualization of 3D CINE PC-MRI data.

Authors:  Ramona Lorenz; Jelena Bock; Jeff Snyder; Jan G Korvink; Bernd A Jung; Michael Markl
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Toward translating near-infrared spectroscopy oxygen saturation data for the non-invasive prediction of spatial and temporal hemodynamics during exercise.

Authors:  Laura Ellwein; Margaret M Samyn; Michael Danduran; Sheila Schindler-Ivens; Stacy Liebham; John F LaDisa
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2016-07-04

4.  Analysis of temperature dependence of background phase errors in phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Julia Busch; S Johanna Vannesjo; Christoph Barmet; Klaas P Pruessmann; Sebastian Kozerke
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 5.364

5.  High Field MicroMRI Velocimetric Measurement of Quantitative Local Flow Curves.

Authors:  Tatiana Nikolaeva; Frank J Vergeldt; Raquel Serial; Joshua A Dijksman; Paul Venema; Adrian Voda; John van Duynhoven; Henk Van As
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 6.986

6.  Assessment of single-vessel cerebral blood velocity by phase contrast fMRI.

Authors:  Xuming Chen; Yuanyuan Jiang; Sangcheon Choi; Rolf Pohmann; Klaus Scheffler; David Kleinfeld; Xin Yu
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 8.029

7.  Experimental Validation of Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (EMRI) Using Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV).

Authors:  Giacomo Annio; Ryo Torii; Andrea Ducci; Vivek Muthurangu; Victor Tsang; Gaetano Burriesci
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 8.  4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement.

Authors:  Petter Dyverfeldt; Malenka Bissell; Alex J Barker; Ann F Bolger; Carl-Johan Carlhäll; Tino Ebbers; Christopher J Francios; Alex Frydrychowicz; Julia Geiger; Daniel Giese; Michael D Hope; Philip J Kilner; Sebastian Kozerke; Saul Myerson; Stefan Neubauer; Oliver Wieben; Michael Markl
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 5.364

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.