4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging: blood flow quantification compared to 2-D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and Doppler echocardiography.
Background: Doppler echocardiography (echo) is the reference standard for blood flow velocity analysis, and two-dimensional (2-D) phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the reference standard for quantitative blood flow assessment. However, both clinical standard-of-care techn...
| Published in: | Pediatric Radiology Vol. 45; no. 6; pp. 804 - 814 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
| Format: | research Journal Article |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
Jun2015
|
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=109741188&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 109741188 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 03010449 O03 jtl: Pediatric Radiology issn: 03010449 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jun2015 vid: 45 iid: 6 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature place: New York, New York artinfo: ui: 109741188 NLM25487721 2013028540 10.1007/s00247-014-3246-z NLM25487721 PMC4450116 109741188 ppf: 804 ppct: 10 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: 4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging: blood flow quantification compared to 2-D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and Doppler echocardiography. aug: au: Gabbour, Maya Schnell, Susanne Jarvis, Kelly Robinson, Joshua D Markl, Michael Rigsby, Cynthia K sug: ab: Background: Doppler echocardiography (echo) is the reference standard for blood flow velocity analysis, and two-dimensional (2-D) phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the reference standard for quantitative blood flow assessment. However, both clinical standard-of-care techniques are limited by 2-D acquisitions and single-direction velocity encoding and may make them inadequate to assess the complex three-dimensional hemodynamics seen in congenital heart disease. Four-dimensional flow MRI (4-D flow) enables qualitative and quantitative analysis of complex blood flow in the heart and great arteries.Objectives: The objectives of this study are to compare 4-D flow with 2-D phase-contrast MRI for quantification of aortic and pulmonary flow and to evaluate the advantage of 4-D flow-based volumetric flow analysis compared to 2-D phase-contrast MRI and echo for peak velocity assessment in children and young adults.Materials and Methods: Two-dimensional phase-contrast MRI of the aortic root, main pulmonary artery (MPA), and right and left pulmonary arteries (RPA, LPA) and 4-D flow with volumetric coverage of the aorta and pulmonary arteries were performed in 50 patients (mean age: 13.1 ± 6.4 years). Four-dimensional flow analyses included calculation of net flow and regurgitant fraction with 4-D flow analysis planes similarly positioned to 2-D planes. In addition, 4-D flow volumetric assessment of aortic root/ascending aorta and MPA peak velocities was performed and compared to 2-D phase-contrast MRI and echo.Results: Excellent correlation and agreement were found between 2-D phase-contrast MRI and 4-D flow for net flow (r = 0.97, P < 0.001) and excellent correlation with good agreement was found for regurgitant fraction (r = 0.88, P < 0.001) in all vessels. Two-dimensional phase-contrast MRI significantly underestimated aortic (P = 0.032) and MPA (P < 0.001) peak velocities compared to echo, while volumetric 4-D flow analysis resulted in higher (aortic: P = 0.001) or similar (MPA: P = 0.98) peak velocities relative to echo.Conclusion: Excellent flow parameter agreement between 2-D phase-contrast MRI and 4-D flow and the improved volumetric 4-D flow velocity analysis relative to echo suggests that 4-D flow has the potential to become a clinical alternative to 2-D phase-contrast MRI. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|