Literature DB >> 25460329

Quantifying errors in flow measurement using phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of several boundary detection methods.

Jing Jiang1, Paul Kokeny2, Wang Ying3, Chris Magnano4, Robert Zivadinov4, E Mark Haacke5.   

Abstract

Quantifying flow from phase-contrast MRI (PC-MRI) data requires that the vessels of interest be segmented. The estimate of the vessel area will dictate the type and magnitude of the error sources that affect the flow measurement. These sources of errors are well understood, and mathematical expressions have been derived for them in previous work. However, these expressions contain many parameters that render them difficult to use for making practical error estimates. In this work, some realistic assumptions were made that allow for the simplification of such expressions in order to make them more useful. These simplified expressions were then used to numerically simulate the effect of segmentation accuracy and provide some criteria that if met, would keep errors in flow quantification below 10% or 5%. Four different segmentation methods were used on simulated and phantom MRA data to verify the theoretical results. Numerical simulations showed that including partial volumed edge pixels in vessel segmentation provides less error than missing them. This was verified with MRA simulations, as the best performing segmentation method generally included such pixels. Further, it was found that to obtain a flow error of less than 10% (5%), the vessel should be at least 4 (5) pixels in diameter, have an SNR of at least 10:1 and have a peak velocity to saturation cut-off velocity ratio of at least 5:3.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Flow error; Flow quantification; Magnetic resonance imaging; Vessel segmentation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25460329      PMCID: PMC4293330          DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2014.10.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0730-725X            Impact factor:   2.546


  17 in total

1.  Automatic vessel segmentation using active contours in cine phase contrast flow measurements.

Authors:  S Kozerke; R Botnar; S Oyre; M B Scheidegger; E M Pedersen; P Boesiger
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Phase contrast MRI quantification of pulsatile volumes of brain arteries, veins, and cerebrospinal fluids compartments: repeatability and physiological interactions.

Authors:  Anders Wåhlin; Khalid Ambarki; Jón Hauksson; Richard Birgander; Jan Malm; Anders Eklund
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-12-14       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.  Correction of phase offset errors in main pulmonary artery flow quantification.

Authors:  Jan-Willem Lankhaar; Mark B M Hofman; J Tim Marcus; Jaco J M Zwanenburg; Theo J C Faes; Anton Vonk-Noordegraaf
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.813

5.  Assessing arterial blood flow and vessel area variations using real-time zonal phase-contrast MRI.

Authors:  Markus Oelhafen; Juerg Schwitter; Sebastian Kozerke; Roger Luechinger; Peter Boesiger
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Limits to the accuracy of vessel diameter measurement in MR angiography.

Authors:  R M Hoogeveen; C J Bakker; M A Viergever
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1998 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Accurate noninvasive quantitation of blood flow, cross-sectional lumen vessel area and wall shear stress by three-dimensional paraboloid modeling of magnetic resonance imaging velocity data.

Authors:  S Oyre; S Ringgaard; S Kozerke; W P Paaske; M Erlandsen; P Boesiger; E M Pedersen
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Accuracy and precision of vessel area assessment: manual versus automatic lumen delineation based on full-width at half-maximum.

Authors:  Maarten A G Merkx; Javier Oliván Bescós; Liesbeth Geerts; E Mariëlle H Bosboom; Frans N van de Vosse; Marcel Breeuwer
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-07-23       Impact factor: 4.813

9.  Analysis of systematic and random error in MR volumetric flow measurements.

Authors:  R L Wolf; R L Ehman; S J Riederer; P J Rossman
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 4.668

10.  Semiautomated method for noise reduction and background phase error correction in MR phase velocity data.

Authors:  P G Walker; G B Cranney; M B Scheidegger; G Waseleski; G M Pohost; A P Yoganathan
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1993 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.813

View more
  11 in total

1.  Quantitative Flow Imaging in Human Umbilical Vessels In Utero Using Nongated 2D Phase Contrast MRI.

Authors:  Uday Krishnamurthy; Brijesh K Yadav; Pavan K Jella; Ewart Mark Haacke; Edgar Hernandez-Andrade; Swati Mody; Lami Yeo; Sonia S Hassan; Roberto Romero; Jaladhar Neelavalli
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2017-12-23       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Characterizing pulsatility in distal cerebral arteries using 4D flow MRI.

Authors:  Tomas Vikner; Lars Nyberg; Madelene Holmgren; Jan Malm; Anders Eklund; Anders Wåhlin
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2019-11-13       Impact factor: 6.200

3.  Jugular Anomalies in Multiple Sclerosis Are Associated with Increased Collateral Venous Flow.

Authors:  S K Sethi; A M Daugherty; G Gadda; D T Utriainen; J Jiang; N Raz; E M Haacke
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Age differences in arterial and venous extra-cerebral blood flow in healthy adults: contributions of vascular risk factors and genetic variants.

Authors:  Naftali Raz; Ana M Daugherty; Sean K Sethi; Muzamil Arshad; E Mark Haacke
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 3.270

5.  Real-Time Phase-Contrast MRI to Monitor Cervical Blood and Cerebrospinal Fluid Flow Beat-by-Beat Variability.

Authors:  Giuseppe Baselli; Federica Fasani; Laura Pelizzari; Marta Cazzoli; Francesca Baglio; Maria Marcella Laganà
Journal:  Biosensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-15

6.  Modeling Bias Error in 4D Flow MRI Velocity Measurements.

Authors:  Sean M Rothenberger; Jiacheng Zhang; Melissa C Brindise; Susanne Schnell; Michael Markl; Pavlos P Vlachos; Vitaliy L Rayz
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 11.037

7.  Non-invasive MR imaging techniques for measuring femoral arterial flow in a pediatric and adolescent cohort.

Authors:  Jessica E Caterini; Kate Rendall; Barbara Cifra; Jane E Schneiderman; Felix Ratjen; Mike Seed; Tammy Rayner; Ruth Weiss; Brian W McCrindle; Michael D Noseworthy; Craig A Williams; Alan R Barker; Gregory D Wells
Journal:  Physiol Rep       Date:  2022-05

8.  Contributions of Cerebral Blood Flow to Associations Between Blood Pressure Levels and Cognition: The Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility-Reykjavik Study.

Authors:  Justine E Moonen; Behnam Sabayan; Sigurdur Sigurdsson; Mark A van Buchem; Vilmundur Gudnason; Osorio Meirelles; Lenore J Launer
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2021-04-19       Impact factor: 9.897

9.  Phase Error Correction in Time-Averaged 3D Phase Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Cerebral Vasculature.

Authors:  M Ethan MacDonald; Nils D Forkert; G Bruce Pike; Richard Frayne
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Accuracy of blood flow assessment in cerebral arteries with 4D flow MRI: Evaluation with three segmentation methods.

Authors:  Tora Dunås; Madelene Holmgren; Anders Wåhlin; Jan Malm; Anders Eklund
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 4.813

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.