Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21970399›Full record

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.

Marcus Carlsson, Johannes Töger, Mikael Kanski, Karin Markenroth Bloch, Freddy Ståhlberg, Einar Heiberg, Håkan Arheden

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03854071 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Development of Novel Physiological CMR Methods in Health and Disease

TypeinterventionalSponsorSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustRan2018 to 2031Enrolled135ConditionsHeart Failure, Pulmonary Hypertension, Myocardial Infarction, Coronary Artery DiseaseArmsintravenous fluid challenge
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Pulmonary 4D-flow MRI imaging in landrace pigs under rest and stress.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024
    Article
  4. 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 · 2023
    Article
  5. 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement: 2023 update.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Comparison of 2D and 4D Flow MRI in Neonates Without General Anesthesia.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Dual-VJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2020
    Article
  16. 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 · 2019
    Article
  17. Clinical Applications of MRA 4D-Flow.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2019
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Marcus CarlssonDept of Clinical Physiology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. marcus.carlsson@med.lu.se
Johannes Töger
Mikael Kanski
Karin Markenroth Bloch
Freddy Ståhlberg
Einar Heiberg
Håkan Arheden

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Coronary CirculationImaging, Three-DimensionalAdultAortaBlood Flow VelocityFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMyocardial Perfusion ImagingPredictive Value of TestsPulmonary CirculationReference ValuesRegional Blood FlowReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID21970399
PMCPMC3213199

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.