Alexandru Grigorescu Fredriksson1,2, Emil Svalbring1, Jonatan Eriksson1,3, Petter Dyverfeldt1,3, Urban Alehagen1,4, Jan Engvall1,3,5, Tino Ebbers1,3,6, Carl-Johan Carlhäll1,3,5. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 2. Research and Development Unit, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden. 3. Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 4. Department of Cardiology, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 5. Department of Clinical Physiology, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 6. Division of Media and Information Technology, Department of Science and Technology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate whether 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can detect subtle right ventricular (RV) dysfunction in primary left ventricular (LV) disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 4D flow and morphological 3T MRI data were acquired in 22 patients with mild ischemic heart disease who were stratified into two groups based on LV end-diastolic volume index (EDVI): lower-LVEDVI and higher-LVEDVI, as well as in 11 healthy controls. The RV volume was segmented at end-diastole (ED) and end-systole (ES). Pathlines were emitted from the ED volume and traced forwards and backwards in time to ES. The blood volume was separated into flow components. The Direct Flow (DF) component was defined as RV inflow passing directly to outflow. The kinetic energy (KE) of the DF component was calculated. Echocardiographic conventional RV indices were also assessed. RESULTS: The higher-LVEDVI group had larger LVEDVI and lower LV ejection fraction (98 ± 32 ml/m(2) ; 48 ± 13%) compared to the healthy (67 ± 12, P = 0.002; 64 ± 7, P < 0.001) and lower-LVEDI groups (62 ± 10; 68 ± 7, both P < 0.001). The RV 4D flow-specific measures "DF/EDV volume-ratio" and "DF/EDV KE-ratio at ED" were lower in the higher-LVEDVI group (38 ± 5%; 52 ± 6%) compared to the healthy (44 ± 6; 65 ± 7, P = 0.018 and P < 0.001) and lower-LVEDVI groups (44 ± 6; 64 ± 7, P = 0.011 and P < 0.001). There was no difference in any of the conventional MRI and echocardiographic RV indices between the three groups. CONCLUSION: We found that in primary LV disease mild impairment of RV function can be detected by 4D flow-specific measures, but not by the conventional MRI and echocardiographic indices.
PURPOSE: To investigate whether 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can detect subtle right ventricular (RV) dysfunction in primary left ventricular (LV) disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 4D flow and morphological 3T MRI data were acquired in 22 patients with mild ischemic heart disease who were stratified into two groups based on LV end-diastolic volume index (EDVI): lower-LVEDVI and higher-LVEDVI, as well as in 11 healthy controls. The RV volume was segmented at end-diastole (ED) and end-systole (ES). Pathlines were emitted from the ED volume and traced forwards and backwards in time to ES. The blood volume was separated into flow components. The Direct Flow (DF) component was defined as RV inflow passing directly to outflow. The kinetic energy (KE) of the DF component was calculated. Echocardiographic conventional RV indices were also assessed. RESULTS: The higher-LVEDVI group had larger LVEDVI and lower LV ejection fraction (98 ± 32 ml/m(2) ; 48 ± 13%) compared to the healthy (67 ± 12, P = 0.002; 64 ± 7, P < 0.001) and lower-LVEDI groups (62 ± 10; 68 ± 7, both P < 0.001). The RV 4D flow-specific measures "DF/EDV volume-ratio" and "DF/EDV KE-ratio at ED" were lower in the higher-LVEDVI group (38 ± 5%; 52 ± 6%) compared to the healthy (44 ± 6; 65 ± 7, P = 0.018 and P < 0.001) and lower-LVEDVI groups (44 ± 6; 64 ± 7, P = 0.011 and P < 0.001). There was no difference in any of the conventional MRI and echocardiographic RV indices between the three groups. CONCLUSION: We found that in primary LV disease mild impairment of RV function can be detected by 4D flow-specific measures, but not by the conventional MRI and echocardiographic indices.
Authors: Vivian P Kamphuis; Jos J M Westenberg; Roel L F van der Palen; Pieter J van den Boogaard; Rob J van der Geest; Albert de Roos; Nico A Blom; Arno A W Roest; Mohammed S M Elbaz Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Philip A Corrado; Andrew L Wentland; Jitka Starekova; Archana Dhyani; Kara N Goss; Oliver Wieben Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 7.034
Authors: Lei Wang; Min Liu; Pei Yao Zhang; Jin Zhu Dai; Hai Yi Ma; Xin Cao Tao; Wan Mu Xie; Jun Wan; An Jing Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2021-08
Authors: Emil Svalbring; Alexandru Fredriksson; Jonatan Eriksson; Petter Dyverfeldt; Tino Ebbers; Ann F Bolger; Jan Engvall; Carl-Johan Carlhäll Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Vivian P Kamphuis; Jos J M Westenberg; Roel L F van der Palen; Nico A Blom; Albert de Roos; Rob van der Geest; Mohammed S M Elbaz; Arno A W Roest Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Vivian P Kamphuis; Roel L F van der Palen; Patrick J H de Koning; Mohammed S M Elbaz; Rob J van der Geest; Albert de Roos; Arno A W Roest; Jos J M Westenberg Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Natasha Barker; Benjamin Fidock; Christopher S Johns; Harjinder Kaur; Gareth Archer; Smitha Rajaram; Catherine Hill; Steven Thomas; Kavitasagary Karunasaagarar; David Capener; Abdullah Al-Mohammad; Alexander Rothman; David G Kiely; Andrew J Swift; James M Wild; Pankaj Garg Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 3.411