Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging: blood flow quantification compared to 2-D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and Doppler echocardiography
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging: blood flow quantification compared to 2-D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and Doppler echocardiography
Do you wish to request the book?
4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging: blood flow quantification compared to 2-D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and Doppler echocardiography
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging: blood flow quantification compared to 2-D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and Doppler echocardiography
2015
Overview
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.
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg,Springer Nature B.V
