Literature DB >> 22362096

In vivo and in vitro validation of aortic flow quantification by time-resolved three-dimensional velocity-encoded MRI.

Fabian Rengier1, Michael Delles, Roland Unterhinninghofen, Sebastian Ley, Matthias Müller-Eschner, Sasan Partovi, Philipp Geisbüsch, Rüdiger Dillmann, Hans-Ulrich Kauczor, Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk.   

Abstract

Three-dimensional velocity-encoded cine magnetic resonance imaging (3D VEC MRI) allows for calculation of secondary flow parameters that may be used to estimate prognosis of individual cardiovascular diseases. However, its accuracy has not been fully investigated yet. The purpose of this study was to validate aortic flow quantification by 3D VEC MRI in vitro and in vivo using stacked two-dimensional acquisitions. Time-resolved stacks of two-dimensional planes with three-directional velocity-encoding (stacked-2D-3dir-MRI) were acquired in an elastic tube phantom with pulsatile flow simulating aortic flow as well as in 11 healthy volunteers (23 ± 2 years). Previously validated two-dimensional through-plane VEC MRI at six equidistant levels in vitro and three locations in vivo (ascending aorta/aortic arch/descending aorta) was used as reference standard. The percentage difference of the stacked-2D-3dir-MRI measurement to the reference standard was defined as the parameter for accuracy. For in vitro aortic flow, stacked-2D-3dir-MRI underestimated average velocity by -6.8% (p < 0.001), overestimated average area by 13.6% (p < 0.001), and underestimated average flow by -7.4% (p < 0.001). Accuracy was significantly higher in the field of view centre compared to off-centre (p = 0.001). In vivo, stacked-2D-3dir-MRI underestimated average velocity (all three locations p < 0.001) and overestimated average area at all three locations (p = n.s./<0.001/<0.001). Average flow was significantly underestimated in the ascending aorta (p = 0.035), but tended to be overestimated in the aortic arch and descending aorta. In conclusion, stacked-2D-3dir-MRI tends to overestimate average aortic area and to underestimate average aortic velocity, resulting in significant underestimation of average flow in the ascending aorta.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22362096     DOI: 10.1007/s10554-012-0027-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1569-5794            Impact factor:   2.357


  33 in total

1.  Polynomial regularization for robust MRI-based estimation of blood flow velocities and pressure gradients.

Authors:  Michael Delles; Fabian Rengier; Sebastian Ley; Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Rüdiger Dillmann; Roland Unterhinninghofen
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2011

2.  Flow-sensitive four-dimensional cine magnetic resonance imaging for offline blood flow quantification in multiple vessels: a validation study.

Authors:  Sarah Nordmeyer; Eugénie Riesenkampff; Gérard Crelier; Alireza Khasheei; Bernhard Schnackenburg; Felix Berger; Titus Kuehne
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  In vitro validation of phase-contrast flow measurements at 3 T in comparison to 1.5 T: precision, accuracy, and signal-to-noise ratios.

Authors:  Joachim Lotz; Rolf Döker; Ralph Noeske; Meike Schüttert; Roland Felix; Michael Galanski; Matthias Gutberlet; Gerd Peter Meyer
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Measurement of signal-to-noise ratios in MR images: influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters.

Authors:  Olaf Dietrich; José G Raya; Scott B Reeder; Maximilian F Reiser; Stefan O Schoenberg
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 5.  Imaging of the thoracic aorta with time-resolved three-dimensional phase-contrast MRI: a review.

Authors:  Thomas A Hope; Robert J Herfkens
Journal:  Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2008

6.  Quantitative 2D and 3D phase contrast MRI: optimized analysis of blood flow and vessel wall parameters.

Authors:  A F Stalder; M F Russe; A Frydrychowicz; J Bock; J Hennig; M Markl
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.668

7.  Four-dimensional visualization of thoracic blood flow by magnetic resonance imaging in a patient following correction of transposition of the great arteries (d-TGA) and uncorrected aortic coarctation.

Authors:  J Ley-Zaporozhan; R Unterhinninghofen; F Rengier; M Markl; J Eichhorn; H von Tengg-Kobligk; S Ley
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.990

8.  Reproducibility of flow and wall shear stress analysis using flow-sensitive four-dimensional MRI.

Authors:  Michael Markl; Wolf Wallis; Andreas Harloff
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.813

9.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging measurements in intracranial aneurysms in vivo of flow patterns, velocity fields, and wall shear stress: comparison with computational fluid dynamics.

Authors:  Loic Boussel; Vitaliy Rayz; Alastair Martin; Gabriel Acevedo-Bolton; Michael T Lawton; Randall Higashida; Wade S Smith; William L Young; David Saloner
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.668

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Cardiovascular imaging 2012 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Hiram G Bezerra; Ricardo A Costa; Johan H C Reiber; Frank J Rybicki; Paul Schoenhagen; Arthur A Stillman; Johan De Sutter; Nico R L Van de Veire; Ernst E van der Wall
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.357

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.