The clinical impact of phase offset errors and different correction methods in cardiovascular magnetic resonance phase contrast imaging: a multi-scanner study

Background: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) phase contrast (PC) flow measurements suffer from phase offset errors. Background subtraction based on stationary phantom measurements can most reliably be used to overcome this inaccuracy. Stationary tissue correction is an alternative and does not require additional phantom scanning. The aim of this study was 1) to compare measurements with and without stationary tissue correction to phantom corrected measurements on different GE Healthcare CMR scanners using different software packages and 2) to evaluate the clinical implications of these methods. Methods: CMR PC imaging of both the aortic and pulmonary artery flow was performed in patients on three different 1.5 T CMR scanners (GE Healthcare) using identical scan parameters. Uncorrected, first, second and third order stationary tissue corrected flow measurement were compared to phantom corrected flow measurements, our reference method, using Medis QFlow, Circle cvi42 and MASS software. The optimal (optimized) stationary tissue order was determined per scanner and software program. Velo

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging analysis in STEMI: quantitative or still visual?

Cardiovascular Aspects of Radiolog

Assessment of left ventricular function: visual or quantitative?

Cardiovascular Aspects of Radiolog

Cardiovascular dynamics in ischemic cardiomyopathy during exercise

Cardiac Dysfunction and Arrhythmia

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

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) enables assessment and quantification of morphological and functional parameters of the heart, including chamber size and function, diameters of the aorta and pulmonary arteries, flow and myocardial relaxation times. Knowledge of reference ranges ("normal values") for quantitative CMR is crucial to interpretation of results and to distinguish normal from disease. Compared to the previous version of this review published in 2015, we present updated and expanded reference values for morphological and functional CMR parameters of the cardiovascular system based on the peer-reviewed literature and current CMR techniques. Further, databases and references for deep learning methods are included

Positron emission tomography; viable tool in patients pre-CABG?

Vascular Biology and Interventio

Distal protection beneficial?

Vascular Biology and Interventio

Increased accuracy in computed tomography coronary angiography; a new body surface area adapted protocol

Vascular Biology and Interventio

Stress imaging in patients with diabetes; routine practice?

Ventricular Dysfunction & Heart Failur