Monica Sigovan1, Petter Dyverfeldt2, Jarrett Wrenn3, Elaine E Tseng4, David Saloner3, Michael D Hope3. 1. Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, UCSF, CA, USA; Université de Lyon, CREATIS; CNRS UMR5220; Inserm U1044; INSA-Lyon; Université Lyon 1; Hospices Civils de Lyon, France. Electronic address: monica.sigovan1@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, UCSF, CA, USA; Linkoping University, Linkoping, Sweden. 3. Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, UCSF, CA, USA. 4. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, UCSF, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Flow displacement quantifies eccentric flow, a potential risk factor for aneurysms in the ascending aorta, but only at a single anatomic location. The aim of this study is to extend flow displacement analysis to 3D in patients with aortic and aortic valve pathologies. METHODS: 43 individuals were studied with 4DFlow MRI in 6 groups: healthy, tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) with aortic stenosis (AS) but no dilatation, TAV with dilatation but no AS, and TAV with both AS and dilatation, BAV without AS or dilatation, BAV without AS but with dilation. The protocol was approved by our institutional review board, and informed consent was obtained. Flow displacement was calculated for multiple planes along the ascending aorta, and 2D and 3D analyses were compared. RESULTS: Good correlation was found between 2D flow displacement and both maximum and average 3D values (r>0.8). Healthy controls had significantly lower flow displacement values with all approaches (p<0.05). The highest flow displacement was seen with stenotic TAV and aortic dilation (0.24±0.02 with maximum flow displacement). The 2D approach underestimated the maximum flow displacement by more than 20% in 13 out of 36 patients (36%). CONCLUSIONS: The extended 3D flow displacement analysis offers a more comprehensive quantitative evaluation of abnormal systolic flow in the ascending aorta than 2D analysis. Differences between patient subgroups are better demonstrated, and maximum flow displacement is more reliably assessed.
BACKGROUND: Flow displacement quantifies eccentric flow, a potential risk factor for aneurysms in the ascending aorta, but only at a single anatomic location. The aim of this study is to extend flow displacement analysis to 3D in patients with aortic and aortic valve pathologies. METHODS: 43 individuals were studied with 4DFlow MRI in 6 groups: healthy, tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) with aortic stenosis (AS) but no dilatation, TAV with dilatation but no AS, and TAV with both AS and dilatation, BAV without AS or dilatation, BAV without AS but with dilation. The protocol was approved by our institutional review board, and informed consent was obtained. Flow displacement was calculated for multiple planes along the ascending aorta, and 2D and 3D analyses were compared. RESULTS: Good correlation was found between 2D flow displacement and both maximum and average 3D values (r>0.8). Healthy controls had significantly lower flow displacement values with all approaches (p<0.05). The highest flow displacement was seen with stenotic TAV and aortic dilation (0.24±0.02 with maximum flow displacement). The 2D approach underestimated the maximum flow displacement by more than 20% in 13 out of 36 patients (36%). CONCLUSIONS: The extended 3D flow displacement analysis offers a more comprehensive quantitative evaluation of abnormal systolic flow in the ascending aorta than 2D analysis. Differences between patient subgroups are better demonstrated, and maximum flow displacement is more reliably assessed.
Authors: Alex J Barker; Michael Markl; Jonas Bürk; Ramona Lorenz; Jelena Bock; Simon Bauer; Jeanette Schulz-Menger; Florian von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-06-22 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Michael D Hope; Thomas A Hope; Stephen E S Crook; Karen G Ordovas; Thomas H Urbania; Marc T Alley; Charles B Higgins Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2011-07
Authors: Michael D Hope; Petter Dyverfeldt; Gabriel Acevedo-Bolton; Jarrett Wrenn; Elyse Foster; Elaine Tseng; David Saloner Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2011-09-09 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Michael D Hope; Jarrett Wrenn; Monica Sigovan; Elyse Foster; Elaine E Tseng; David Saloner Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Malenka M Bissell; Aaron T Hess; Luca Biasiolli; Steffan J Glaze; Margaret Loudon; Alex Pitcher; Anne Davis; Bernard Prendergast; Michael Markl; Alex J Barker; Stefan Neubauer; Saul G Myerson Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: R Lorenz; J Bock; A J Barker; F von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff; W Wallis; J G Korvink; M M Bissell; J Schulz-Menger; M Markl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Sebastian Ebel; Alexander Kühn; Abhinav Aggarwal; Benjamin Köhler; Benjamin Behrendt; Robin Gohmann; Boris Riekena; Christian Lücke; Juliane Ziegert; Charlotte Vogtmann; Bernhard Preim; Siegfried Kropf; Bernd Jung; Timm Denecke; Matthias Grothoff; Matthias Gutberlet Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2022-05-25 Impact factor: 5.315