ArticleJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2011
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.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03854071 (Development of Novel Physiological CMR Methods in Health and Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 48 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Development of Novel Physiological CMR Methods in Health and Disease
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increased contractility affects left ventricular kinetic energy in pulmonary hypertension.Physiological reports · 2025Observational
- Highly accelerated 4D flow MRI with respiratory compensation and cardiac view sharing: a cross-sectional study of flow in the great vessels of pediatric congenital heart disease.Pediatric radiology · 2025Article
- Pulmonary 4D-flow MRI imaging in landrace pigs under rest and stress.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024Article
- Hemodynamic forces from 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging predict left ventricular remodeling following cardiac resynchronization therapy.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Article
- 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement: 2023 update.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023Review
- A clinician's guide to understanding aortic 4D flow MRI.Insights into imaging · 2023Review
- Comparison of 2D and 4D Flow MRI in Neonates Without General Anesthesia.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2023Article
- FlowRAU-Net: Accelerated 4D Flow MRI of Aortic Valvular Flows With a Deep 2D Residual Attention Network.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2022Article
- Increased biventricular hemodynamic forces in precapillary pulmonary hypertension.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2021Article
- 4D flow MRI applications in congenital heart disease.European radiology · 2021Review
- Recommendation for Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Phenotypic Study: Imaging Part.Phenomics (Cham, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Validation of non-contrast multiple overlapping thin-slab 4D-flow cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2020Article
- Compressed-sensing accelerated 4D flow MRI of cerebrospinal fluid dynamics.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2020Article
- Dual-VJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020Article
- Accelerated aortic 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance using compressed sensing: applicability, validation and clinical integration.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2019Article
- Clinical Applications of MRA 4D-Flow.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2019Review
- Validation and reproducibility of cardiovascular 4D-flow MRI from two vendors using 2 × 2 parallel imaging acceleration in pulsatile flow phantom and in vivo with and without respiratory gating.Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987) · 2019Article
- Comparison of 4D Flow MRI to 2D Flow MRI in the pulmonary arteries in healthy volunteers and patients with pulmonary hypertension.PloS one · 2019Article
- Comparison of 4D Flow MRI and Particle Image Velocimetry Using an In Vitro Carotid Bifurcation Model.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThree-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.
methodsThe 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.
resultsGood accuracy of SV quantification was found using 3 T 4D-SENSE (r2 = 0.86, -0.7 ± 7.6%) and although a larger bias was found on 1.5 T (r2 = 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 (r2 = 0.65, -15.6 ± 13.7%) compared to 3 T (r2 = 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).
conclusionsThe 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.