Yong He1, Yan-Ting Shiu2, Daniel B Pike3, Prabir Roy-Chaudhury4, Alfred K Cheung5, Scott A Berceli6. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fla; Malcom Randall VA Medical Center, Gainesville, Fla. 2. Division of Nephrology & Hypertension, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 3. Department of Bioengineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. 4. Division of Nephrology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz. 5. Division of Nephrology & Hypertension, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; Medical Service, Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah; Department of Nephrology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, People's Republic of China. 6. Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fla; Malcom Randall VA Medical Center, Gainesville, Fla. Electronic address: bercesa@surgery.ufl.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare blood flow rates measured by Doppler ultrasound (DUS) and phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients having a hemodialysis arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and to identify scenarios in which there was significant discordance between these two approaches. METHODS: Blood flow rates in the proximal artery (PA) and draining vein (DV) of newly created upper extremity AVFs were measured and compared using DUS and phase-contrast MRI at 1 day, 6 weeks, and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Blood flow rates in the PA measured by DUS (1155 ± 907 mL/min, mean ± standard deviation) and by MRI (1170 ± 657 mL/min) were not statistically different (P = .812) based on 78 data pairs from 49 patients. DV DUS flow (1277 ± 995 mL/min) and MRI flow (1130 ± 655 mL/min) were also not statistically different (P = .071) based on 64 data pairs. In both PA and DV, the two methods substantially agreed with each other (Cohen κ: PA, 0.66; DV, 0.67) when flow rates were put into four clinically relevant categories (<300, 300-599, 600-1499, and ≥1500 mL/min). The Bland-Altman analyses of DUS and MRI flow identified six and four outliers for PA and DV, respectively. Seven outliers had higher DUS than MRI flow, with all DUS scan sites having a large lumen or significant local curvature; the other three had lower DUS flow, partly due to an underestimation of lumen diameter by DUS. CONCLUSIONS: DUS and MRI flow rates are generally comparable in both PA and DV. When DUS is used for flow measurements, careful attention to accurate lumen diameter measurements is needed and scan sites with marked curvature should be avoided. Our result may improve the accuracy of DUS-measured AVF blood flow rate. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare blood flow rates measured by Doppler ultrasound (DUS) and phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients having a hemodialysis arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and to identify scenarios in which there was significant discordance between these two approaches. METHODS: Blood flow rates in the proximal artery (PA) and draining vein (DV) of newly created upper extremity AVFs were measured and compared using DUS and phase-contrast MRI at 1 day, 6 weeks, and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Blood flow rates in the PA measured by DUS (1155 ± 907 mL/min, mean ± standard deviation) and by MRI (1170 ± 657 mL/min) were not statistically different (P = .812) based on 78 data pairs from 49 patients. DV DUS flow (1277 ± 995 mL/min) and MRI flow (1130 ± 655 mL/min) were also not statistically different (P = .071) based on 64 data pairs. In both PA and DV, the two methods substantially agreed with each other (Cohen κ: PA, 0.66; DV, 0.67) when flow rates were put into four clinically relevant categories (<300, 300-599, 600-1499, and ≥1500 mL/min). The Bland-Altman analyses of DUS and MRI flow identified six and four outliers for PA and DV, respectively. Seven outliers had higher DUS than MRI flow, with all DUS scan sites having a large lumen or significant local curvature; the other three had lower DUS flow, partly due to an underestimation of lumen diameter by DUS. CONCLUSIONS: DUS and MRI flow rates are generally comparable in both PA and DV. When DUS is used for flow measurements, careful attention to accurate lumen diameter measurements is needed and scan sites with marked curvature should be avoided. Our result may improve the accuracy of DUS-measured AVF blood flow rate. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Doppler ultrasound flow error source; Fistula failure; Fistula maturation; Fistula surveillance and monitoring; Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging
Authors: John M Hudson; Ross Williams; Laurent Milot; Qifeng Wei; James Jago; Peter N Burns Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2016-12-12 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Jonas Jensen; Jacob Bjerring Olesen; Matthias Bo Stuart; Peter Møller Hansen; Michael Bachmann Nielsen; Jørgen Arendt Jensen Journal: Ultrasonics Date: 2016-04-30 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Michelle L Robbin; Tom Greene; Alfred K Cheung; Michael Allon; Scott A Berceli; James S Kaufman; Matthew Allen; Peter B Imrey; Milena K Radeva; Yan-Ting Shiu; Heidi R Umphrey; Carlton J Young Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 11.105
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
Authors: Yong He; Christi M Terry; Cuong Nguyen; Scott A Berceli; Yan-Ting E Shiu; Alfred K Cheung Journal: J Biomech Date: 2012-11-01 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Mathilde Paré; Rémi Goupil; Catherine Fortier; Fabrice Mac-Way; François Madore; Bernhard Hametner; Siegfried Wassertheurer; Martin G Schultz; James E Sharman; Mohsen Agharazii Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 2.689