OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance (MR) phase velocity mapping could provide accurate estimates of stenosis severity and pressure gradients in aortic coarctation. BACKGROUND: Clinical management of aortic coarctation requires determination of lesion location and severity and quantification of the pressure gradient across the constricted area. METHODS: Using a series of anatomically accurate models of aortic coarctation, the laboratory portion of this study found that the loss coefficient (K), commonly taken to be 4.0 in the simplified Bernoulli equation delta P = KV2, was a function of stenosis severity. The values of the loss coefficient ranged from 2.8 for a 50% stenosis to 4.9 for a 90% stenosis. Magnetic resonance imaging and MR phase velocity mapping were then used to determine coarctation severity and pressure gradient in 32 patients. RESULTS: Application of the new severity-dependent loss coefficients found that pressure gradients deviated from 1 to 17 mm Hg compared with calculations made with the commonly used value of 4.0. Comparison of MR estimates of pressure gradient with Doppler ultrasound estimates (in 22 of 32 patients) and with catheter pressure measurements (in 6 of 32 patients) supports the conclusion that the severity-based loss coefficient provides improved estimates of pressure gradients. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that MRI could be used as a complete diagnostic tool for accurate evaluation of aortic coarctation, by determining stenosis location and severity and by accurately estimating pressure gradients.
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance (MR) phase velocity mapping could provide accurate estimates of stenosis severity and pressure gradients in aortic coarctation. BACKGROUND: Clinical management of aortic coarctation requires determination of lesion location and severity and quantification of the pressure gradient across the constricted area. METHODS: Using a series of anatomically accurate models of aortic coarctation, the laboratory portion of this study found that the loss coefficient (K), commonly taken to be 4.0 in the simplified Bernoulli equation delta P = KV2, was a function of stenosis severity. The values of the loss coefficient ranged from 2.8 for a 50% stenosis to 4.9 for a 90% stenosis. Magnetic resonance imaging and MR phase velocity mapping were then used to determine coarctation severity and pressure gradient in 32 patients. RESULTS: Application of the new severity-dependent loss coefficients found that pressure gradients deviated from 1 to 17 mm Hg compared with calculations made with the commonly used value of 4.0. Comparison of MR estimates of pressure gradient with Doppler ultrasound estimates (in 22 of 32 patients) and with catheter pressure measurements (in 6 of 32 patients) supports the conclusion that the severity-based loss coefficient provides improved estimates of pressure gradients. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that MRI could be used as a complete diagnostic tool for accurate evaluation of aortic coarctation, by determining stenosis location and severity and by accurately estimating pressure gradients.
Authors: Peter D Gatehouse; Jennifer Keegan; Lindsey A Crowe; Sharmeen Masood; Raad H Mohiaddin; Karl-Friedrich Kreitner; David N Firmin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2005-07-08 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Mohammed Haris Umer Usman; Pablo Rengifo-Moreno; Sean F Janzer; Ignacio Inglessis-Azuaje; Christian Witzke-Sanz Journal: Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med Date: 2014-10
Authors: Amish N Raval; James D Telep; Michael A Guttman; Cengizhan Ozturk; Michael Jones; Richard B Thompson; Victor J Wright; William H Schenke; Ranil DeSilva; Ronnier J Aviles; Venkatesh K Raman; Michael C Slack; Robert J Lederman Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-07-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Francisco J Londono-Hoyos; Abigail Swillens; Joris Van Cauwenberge; Brett Meyers; Maheswara Reddy Koppula; Pavlos Vlachos; Julio A Chirinos; Patrick Segers Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2017-08-16 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: D Didier; C Saint-Martin; C Lapierre; P T Trindade; N Lahlaidi; J P Vallee; A Kalangos; B Friedli; M Beghetti Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2005-11-03 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Frances M Mitchell; Sanjay K Prasad; Gerald F Greil; Peter Drivas; Vassilios S Vassiliou; Claire E Raphael Journal: World J Clin Pediatr Date: 2016-02-08
Authors: Fabrizio Donati; C Alberto Figueroa; Nicolas P Smith; Pablo Lamata; David A Nordsletten Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Sohrab Fratz; Taylor Chung; Gerald F Greil; Margaret M Samyn; Andrew M Taylor; Emanuela R Valsangiacomo Buechel; Shi-Joon Yoo; Andrew J Powell Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2013-06-13 Impact factor: 5.364
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