78 research outputs found

    Test-retest variability of left ventricular 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance measurements in healthy subjects

    Get PDF
    Background: Quantification and visualisation of left ventricular (LV) blood flow is afforded by three-dimensional, time resolved phase contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR 4D flow). However, few data exist upon the repeatability and variability of these parameters in a healthy population. We aimed to assess the repeatability and variability over time of LV 4D CMR flow measurements. Methods: Forty five controls underwent CMR 4D flow data acquisition. Of these, 10 underwent a second scan within the same visit (scan-rescan), 25 returned for a second visit (interval scan; median interval 52 days, IQR 28–57 days). The LV-end diastolic volume (EDV) was divided into four flow components: 1) Direct flow: inflow that passes directly to ejection; 2) Retained inflow: inflow that enters and resides within the LV; 3) Delayed ejection flow: starts within the LV and is ejected and 4) Residual volume: blood that resides within the LV for > 2 cardiac cycles. Each flow components’ volume was related to the EDV (volume-ratio). The kinetic energy at end-diastole (ED) was measured and divided by the components’ volume. Results: The dominant flow component in all 45 controls was the direct flow (volume ratio 38 ± 4%) followed by the residual volume (30 ± 4%), then delayed ejection flow (16 ± 3%) and retained inflow (16 ± 4%). The kinetic energy at ED for each component was direct flow (7.8 ± 3.0 microJ/ml), retained inflow (4.1 ± 2.0 microJ/ml), delayed ejection flow (6.3 ± 2.3 microJ/ml) and the residual volume (1.2 ± 0.5 microJ/ml). The coefficients of variation for the scan-rescan ranged from 2.5%–9.2% for the flow components’ volume ratio and between 13.5%–17.7% for the kinetic energy. The interval scan results showed higher coefficients of variation with values from 6.2–16.1% for the flow components’ volume ratio and 16.9–29.0% for the kinetic energy of the flow components. Conclusion: LV flow components’ volume and their associated kinetic energy values are repeatable and stable within a population over time. However, the variability of these measurements in individuals over time is greater than can be attributed to sources of error in the data acquisition and analysis, suggesting that additional physiological factors may influence LV flow measurements

    Comprehensive 4D velocity mapping of the heart and great vessels by cardiovascular magnetic resonance

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Phase contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is able to measure all three directional components of the velocities of blood flow relative to the three spatial dimensions and the time course of the heart cycle. In this article, methods used for the acquisition, visualization, and quantification of such datasets are reviewed and illustrated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Currently, the acquisition of 3D cine (4D) phase contrast velocity data, synchronized relative to both cardiac and respiratory movements takes about ten minutes or more, even when using parallel imaging and optimized pulse sequence design. The large resulting datasets need appropriate post processing for the visualization of multidirectional flow, for example as vector fields, pathlines or streamlines, or for retrospective volumetric quantification.</p> <p>Applications</p> <p>Multidirectional velocity acquisitions have provided 3D visualization of large scale flow features of the healthy heart and great vessels, and have shown altered patterns of flow in abnormal chambers and vessels. Clinically relevant examples include retrograde streams in atheromatous descending aortas as potential thrombo-embolic pathways in patients with cryptogenic stroke and marked variations of flow visualized in common aortic pathologies. Compared to standard clinical tools, 4D velocity mapping offers the potential for retrospective quantification of flow and other hemodynamic parameters.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Multidirectional, 3D cine velocity acquisitions are contributing to the understanding of normal and pathologically altered blood flow features. Although more rapid and user-friendly strategies for acquisition and analysis may be needed before 4D velocity acquisitions come to be adopted in routine clinical CMR, their capacity to measure multidirectional flows throughout a study volume has contributed novel insights into cardiovascular fluid dynamics in health and disease.</p

    Quantification and visualization of cardiovascular 4D velocity mapping accelerated with parallel imaging or k-t BLAST: head to head comparison and validation at 1.5 T and 3 T

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Three-dimensional time-resolved (4D) phase-contrast (PC) CMR can visualize and quantify cardiovascular flow but is hampered by long acquisition times. Acceleration with SENSE or k-t BLAST are two possibilities but results on validation are lacking, especially at 3 T. The aim of this study was therefore to validate quantitative in vivo cardiac 4D-acquisitions accelerated with parallel imaging and k-t BLAST at 1.5 T and 3 T with 2D-flow as the reference and to investigate if field strengths and type of acceleration have major effects on intracardiac flow visualization.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The local ethical committee approved the study. 13 healthy volunteers were scanned at both 1.5 T and 3 T in random order with 2D-flow of the aorta and main pulmonary artery and two 4D-flow sequences of the heart accelerated with SENSE and k-t BLAST respectively. 2D-image planes were reconstructed at the aortic and pulmonary outflow. Flow curves were calculated and peak flows and stroke volumes (SV) compared to the results from 2D-flow acquisitions. Intra-cardiac flow was visualized using particle tracing and image quality based on the flow patterns of the particles was graded using a four-point scale.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Good accuracy of SV quantification was found using 3 T 4D-SENSE (r<sup>2 </sup>= 0.86, -0.7 ± 7.6%) and although a larger bias was found on 1.5 T (r<sup>2 </sup>= 0.71, -3.6 ± 14.8%), the difference was not significant (p = 0.46). Accuracy of 4D k-t BLAST for SV was lower (p < 0.01) on 1.5 T (r<sup>2 </sup>= 0.65, -15.6 ± 13.7%) compared to 3 T (r<sup>2 </sup>= 0.64, -4.6 ± 10.0%). Peak flow was lower with 4D-SENSE at both 3 T and 1.5 T compared to 2D-flow (p < 0.01) and even lower with 4D k-t BLAST at both scanners (p < 0.01). Intracardiac flow visualization did not differ between 1.5 T and 3 T (p = 0.09) or between 4D-SENSE or 4D k-t BLAST (p = 0.85).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The present study showed that quantitative 4D flow accelerated with SENSE has good accuracy at 3 T and compares favourably to 1.5 T. 4D flow accelerated with k-t BLAST underestimate flow velocities and thereby yield too high bias for intra-cardiac quantitative in vivo use at the present time. For intra-cardiac 4D-flow visualization, however, 1.5 T and 3 T as well as SENSE or k-t BLAST can be used with similar quality.</p

    Volume Tracking: A new method for quantitative assessment and visualization of intracardiac blood flow from three-dimensional, time-resolved, three-component magnetic resonance velocity mapping

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Functional and morphological changes of the heart influence blood flow patterns. Therefore, flow patterns may carry diagnostic and prognostic information. Three-dimensional, time-resolved, three-directional phase contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D PC-CMR) can image flow patterns with unique detail, and using new flow visualization methods may lead to new insights. The aim of this study is to present and validate a novel visualization method with a quantitative potential for blood flow from 4D PC-CMR, called Volume Tracking, and investigate if Volume Tracking complements particle tracing, the most common visualization method used today.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eight healthy volunteers and one patient with a large apical left ventricular aneurysm underwent 4D PC-CMR flow imaging of the whole heart. Volume Tracking and particle tracing visualizations were compared visually side-by-side in a visualization software package. To validate Volume Tracking, the number of particle traces that agreed with the Volume Tracking visualizations was counted and expressed as a percentage of total released particles in mid-diastole and end-diastole respectively. Two independent observers described blood flow patterns in the left ventricle using Volume Tracking visualizations.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Volume Tracking was feasible in all eight healthy volunteers and in the patient. Visually, Volume Tracking and particle tracing are complementary methods, showing different aspects of the flow. When validated against particle tracing, on average 90.5% and 87.8% of the particles agreed with the Volume Tracking surface in mid-diastole and end-diastole respectively. Inflow patterns in the left ventricle varied between the subjects, with excellent agreement between observers. The left ventricular inflow pattern in the patient differed from the healthy subjects.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Volume Tracking is a new visualization method for blood flow measured by 4D PC-CMR. Volume Tracking complements and provides incremental information compared to particle tracing that may lead to a better understanding of blood flow and may improve diagnosis and prognosis of cardiovascular diseases.</p

    The growth and evolution of cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a 20-year history of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) annual scientific sessions

    Get PDF
    Background and purpose: The purpose of this work is to summarize cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) research trends and highlights presented at the annual Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) scientific sessions over the past 20 years. Methods: Scientific programs from all SCMR Annual Scientific Sessions from 1998 to 2017 were obtained. SCMR Headquarters also provided data for the number and the country of origin of attendees and the number of accepted abstracts according to type. Data analysis included text analysis (key word extraction) and visualization by ‘word clouds’ representing the most frequently used words in session titles for 5-year intervals. In addition, session titles were sorted into 17 major subject categories to further evaluate research and clinical CMR trends over time. Results: Analysis of SCMR annual scientific sessions locations, attendance, and number of accepted abstracts demonstrated substantial growth of CMR research and clinical applications. As an international field of study, significant growth of CMR was documented by a strong increase in SCMR scientific session attendance (> 500%, 270 to 1406 from 1998 to 2017, number of accepted abstracts (> 700%, 98 to 701 from 1998 to 2018) and number of international participants (42–415% increase for participants from Asia, Central and South America, Middle East and Africa in 2004–2017). ‘Word clouds’ based evaluation of research trends illustrated a shift from early focus on ‘MRI technique feasibility’ to new established techniques (e.g. late gadolinium enhancement) and their clinical applications and translation (key words ‘patient’, ‘disease’) and more recently novel techniques and quantitative CMR imaging (key words ‘mapping’, ‘T1’, ‘flow’, ‘function’). Nearly every topic category demonstrated an increase in the number of sessions over the 20-year period with ‘Clinical Practice’ leading all categories. Our analysis identified three growth areas ‘Congenital’, ‘Clinical Practice’, and ‘Structure/function/flow’. Conclusion: The analysis of the SCMR historical archives demonstrates a healthy and internationally active field of study which continues to undergo substantial growth and expansion into new and emerging CMR topics and clinical application areas

    Hemodynamic evaluation in patients with transposition of the great arteries after the arterial switch operation: 4D flow and 2D phase contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance compared with Doppler echocardiography

    Get PDF
    Background: Peak velocity measurements are used to evaluate the significance of stenosis in patients with transposition of the great arteries after the arterial switch operation (TGA after ASO). 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides 3-directional velocity encoding and full volumetric coverage of the great arteries and may thus improve the hemodynamic evaluation in these patients. The aim of this study was to compare peak velocities measured by 4D flow CMR with 2D phase contrast (PC) CMR and the gold standard Doppler echocardiography (echo) in patients with TGA after ASO. Methods: Nineteen patients (mean age 13 +/- 9 years, range 1-25 years) with TGA after ASO who underwent 2D PC CMR and 4D flow CMR were included in this study. Peak velocities were measured with 4D flow CMR in the aorta and pulmonary arteries and compared to peak velocities measured with 2D PC CMR and Doppler echo. 2D PC CMR data were available in the ascending aorta, main, right and left pulmonary arteries (AAO/MPA/RPA/LPA) for 19/18/ 17/17 scans, respectively, and Doppler echo data were available for 13/9/6/6 scans, respectively. Peak velocities were measured with: 1) a single cross section for 2D PC CMR, 2) velocity maximum intensity projections (MIPs) for 4D flow CMR and 3) Doppler echo. Results: Significantly higher peak velocities were found with 4D flow CMR than 2D PC CMR in the AAO (p = 0.003), MPA (p = 0.002) and RPA (p = 0.005) but not in the LPA (p = 0.200). No difference in peak velocity was found between 4D flow CMR and Doppler echo (p > 0.46) or 2D PC CMR and echo (p > 0.11) for all analyzed vessel segments. Conclusions: 4D flow CMR evaluation of patients with TGA after ASO detected higher peak velocities than 2D PC CMR, indicating the potential of 4D flow CMR to provide improved stenosis assessment in these patients

    4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement

    Get PDF
    corecore