Literature DB >> 8316066

Comparison between retrospective gating and ECG triggering in magnetic resonance velocity mapping.

L Søndergaard1, F Ståhlberg, C Thomsen, T A Spraggins, E Gymoese, L Malmgren, E Müller, O Henriksen.   

Abstract

ECG-triggered cinematographic studies of the cardiovascular system are hampered by several technical restrictions such as the inability to image end-diastole, ghosting, varying signal intensity, and phase contributions from eddy currents. Retrospective gating may solve these problems, but involves signal manipulation such as interpolating raw data from a time window. In this study, the performance of the two gating strategies was compared in quantitative MR velocity mapping on the abdominal aorta in eight healthy volunteers and on a pulsatile flow phantom. The results were compared to a one-dimensional velocity mapping technique and Doppler ultrasound. Finally, the consequence of decreasing the time window in the raw data interpolation used for retrospective gating was also examined. With retrospective gating, a low-pass filtering was seen, causing significantly prolonged duration and decreased amplitude of flow pulses. However, by reducing the time window retrospectively gated flow measurements were in good agreement with those that are ECG triggered. When fulfilling the demand of a narrow time window for interpolation, retrospective gating offers several advantages in MR velocity mapping.

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8316066     DOI: 10.1016/0730-725x(93)90472-p

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


  9 in total

1.  A method to correct background phase offset for phase-contrast MRI in the presence of steady flow and spatial wrap-around artifact.

Authors:  Aaron A Pruitt; Ning Jin; Yingmin Liu; Orlando P Simonetti; Rizwan Ahmad
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  Right coronary artery flow velocity and volume assessment with spiral K-space sampled breathhold velocity-encoded MRI at 3 tesla: accuracy and reproducibility.

Authors:  Anne Brandts; Stijntje D Roes; Joost Doornbos; Robert G Weiss; Albert de Roos; Matthias Stuber; Jos J M Westenberg
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 3.  Reference ranges ("normal values") for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in adults and children: 2020 update.

Authors:  Nadine Kawel-Boehm; Scott J Hetzel; Bharath Ambale-Venkatesh; Gabriella Captur; Christopher J Francois; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Michael Salerno; Shawn D Teague; Emanuela Valsangiacomo-Buechel; Rob J van der Geest; David A Bluemke
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2020-12-14       Impact factor: 5.364

4.  Comparison of Prospective and Retrospective Gated 4D Flow Cardiac MR Image Acquisitions in the Carotid Bifurcation.

Authors:  Elliott R Hurd; Mengjiao Han; Jason K Mendes; J Rock Hadley; Chris R Johnson; Edward V R DiBella; John N Oshinski; Lucas H Timmins
Journal:  Cardiovasc Eng Technol       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 2.495

5.  Sequence optimization to reduce velocity offsets in cardiovascular magnetic resonance volume flow quantification--a multi-vendor study.

Authors:  Marijn P Rolf; Mark B M Hofman; Peter D Gatehouse; Karin Markenroth-Bloch; Martijn W Heymans; Tino Ebbers; Martin J Graves; John J Totman; Beat Werner; Albert C van Rossum; Philip J Kilner; Rob M Heethaar
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2011-03-09       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 6.  Normal values for cardiovascular magnetic resonance in adults and children.

Authors:  Nadine Kawel-Boehm; Alicia Maceira; Emanuela R Valsangiacomo-Buechel; Jens Vogel-Claussen; Evrim B Turkbey; Rupert Williams; Sven Plein; Michael Tee; John Eng; David A Bluemke
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 5.364

7.  Flow measurement by cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a multi-centre multi-vendor study of background phase offset errors that can compromise the accuracy of derived regurgitant or shunt flow measurements.

Authors:  Peter D Gatehouse; Marijn P Rolf; Martin J Graves; Mark Bm Hofman; John Totman; Beat Werner; Rebecca A Quest; Yingmin Liu; Jochen von Spiczak; Matthias Dieringer; David N Firmin; Albert van Rossum; Massimo Lombardi; Juerg Schwitter; Jeanette Schulz-Menger; Philip J Kilner
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2010-01-14       Impact factor: 5.364

8.  A multi-center inter-manufacturer study of the temporal stability of phase-contrast velocity mapping background offset errors.

Authors:  Peter D Gatehouse; Marijn P Rolf; Karin Markenroth Bloch; Martin J Graves; Philip J Kilner; David N Firmin; Mark B M Hofman
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-10-20       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 9.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance phase contrast imaging.

Authors:  Krishna S Nayak; Jon-Fredrik Nielsen; Matt A Bernstein; Michael Markl; Peter D Gatehouse; Rene M Botnar; David Saloner; Christine Lorenz; Han Wen; Bob S Hu; Frederick H Epstein; John N Oshinski; Subha V Raman
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2015-08-09       Impact factor: 5.364

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.