INTRODUCTION: 4D phase contrast MR imaging (4D PC MRI) has been introduced for spatiotemporal evaluation of intracranial hemodynamics in various cerebrovascular diseases. However, it still lacks validation with standards of reference. Our goal was to compare blood flow quantification derived from 4D PC MRI with transcranial ultrasound and 2D PC MRI. METHODS: Velocity measurements within large intracranial arteries [internal carotid artery (ICA), basilar artery (BA), and middle cerebral artery (MCA)] were obtained in 20 young healthy volunteers with 4D and 2D PC MRI, transcranial Doppler sonography (TCD), and transcranial color-coded duplex sonography (TCCD). Maximum velocities at peak systole (PSV) and end diastole (EDV) were compared using regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Correlation of 4D PC MRI measured velocities was higher in comparison with TCD (r = 0.49-0.66) than with TCCD (0.35-0.44) and 2D PC MRI (0.52-0.60). In mid-BA and ICA C7 segment, a significant correlation was found with TCD (0.68-0.81 and 0.65-0.71, respectively). No significant correlation was found in carotid siphon. On average over all volunteers, PSVs and EDVs in MCA were minimally underestimated compared with TCD/TCCD. Minimal overestimation of velocities was found compared to TCD in mid-BA and ICA C7 segment. CONCLUSION: 4D PC MRI appears as valid alternative for intracranial velocity measurement consistent with previous reference standards, foremost with TCD. Spatiotemporal averaging effects might contribute to vessel size-dependent mild underestimation of velocities in smaller (MCA), and overestimation in larger-sized (BA and ICA) arteries, respectively. Complete spatiotemporal flow analysis may be advantageous in anatomically complex regions (e.g. carotid siphon) relative to restrictions of ultrasound techniques.
INTRODUCTION: 4D phase contrast MR imaging (4D PC MRI) has been introduced for spatiotemporal evaluation of intracranial hemodynamics in various cerebrovascular diseases. However, it still lacks validation with standards of reference. Our goal was to compare blood flow quantification derived from 4D PC MRI with transcranial ultrasound and 2D PC MRI. METHODS: Velocity measurements within large intracranial arteries [internal carotid artery (ICA), basilar artery (BA), and middle cerebral artery (MCA)] were obtained in 20 young healthy volunteers with 4D and 2D PC MRI, transcranial Doppler sonography (TCD), and transcranial color-coded duplex sonography (TCCD). Maximum velocities at peak systole (PSV) and end diastole (EDV) were compared using regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Correlation of 4D PC MRI measured velocities was higher in comparison with TCD (r = 0.49-0.66) than with TCCD (0.35-0.44) and 2D PC MRI (0.52-0.60). In mid-BA and ICA C7 segment, a significant correlation was found with TCD (0.68-0.81 and 0.65-0.71, respectively). No significant correlation was found in carotid siphon. On average over all volunteers, PSVs and EDVs in MCA were minimally underestimated compared with TCD/TCCD. Minimal overestimation of velocities was found compared to TCD in mid-BA and ICA C7 segment. CONCLUSION: 4D PC MRI appears as valid alternative for intracranial velocity measurement consistent with previous reference standards, foremost with TCD. Spatiotemporal averaging effects might contribute to vessel size-dependent mild underestimation of velocities in smaller (MCA), and overestimation in larger-sized (BA and ICA) arteries, respectively. Complete spatiotemporal flow analysis may be advantageous in anatomically complex regions (e.g. carotid siphon) relative to restrictions of ultrasound techniques.
Authors: S Wetzel; S Meckel; A Frydrychowicz; L Bonati; E-W Radue; K Scheffler; J Hennig; M Markl Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: P van Ooij; J J M Zwanenburg; F Visser; C B Majoie; E vanBavel; J Hendrikse; A J Nederveen Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-05-22 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: F V Zananiri; P C Jackson; M Halliwell; R A Harris; J K Hayward; E R Davies; P N Wells Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 1993-12 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Michael Markl; Mary T Draney; Michael D Hope; Jonathan M Levin; Frandics P Chan; Marcus T Alley; Norbert J Pelc; Robert J Herfkens Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Rafael Medero; Katrina Ruedinger; David Rutkowski; Kevin Johnson; Alejandro Roldán-Alzate Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Michael J Rose; Kelly Jarvis; Varun Chowdhary; Alex J Barker; Bradley D Allen; Joshua D Robinson; Michael Markl; Cynthia K Rigsby; Susanne Schnell Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 4.813
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