ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2019
Validation of 4D flow CMR against simultaneous invasive hemodynamic measurements: a swine study.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing transthoracic echocardiography, 2D and 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance for quantitative valve assessment after percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026Article
- Next-Generation Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques for Characterization of Myocardial Disease.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Pulmonary 4D-flow MRI imaging in landrace pigs under rest and stress.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2024Article
- Comparison of aortic blood flow rotational direction in healthy volunteers and patients with bicuspid aortic valves using volumetric velocity-sensitive cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Flow evaluation software for four-dimensional flow MRI: a reliability and validation study.La Radiologia medica · 2023Article
- Phenotyping heart failure by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging of cardiac macro- and microscopic structure: state of the art review.European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging · 2023Review
- Quality Control for 4D Flow MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2022Article
- Influence of Spatial Resolution and Compressed SENSE Acceleration Factor on Flow Quantification with 4D Flow MRI at 3 Tesla.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022Article
- Transesophageal echocardiography in swine: evaluation of left and right ventricular structure, function and myocardial work.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2021Article
- Cardiovascular imaging 2019 in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2020Article
- Clinical Applications of MRA 4D-Flow.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare invasively measured aorta flow with 2D phase contrast flow and 4D flow measurements by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in a large animal model. Nine swine (mean weight 63 ± 4 kg) were included in the study. 4D flow CMR exams were performed on a 1.5T MRI scanner. Flow measurements were performed on 4D flow images at the aortic valve level, in the ascending aorta, and main pulmonary artery. Simultaneously, flow was measured using an invasive flow probe, placed around the ascending aorta. Additionally, standard 2D phase contrast flow and 2D left ventricular (LV) volumetric data were used for comparison. The correlations of cardiac output (CO) between the invasive flow probe, and CMR modalities were strong to very strong. CO measured by 4D flow CMR correlated better with the CO measured by the invasive flow probe than 2D flow CMR flow and volumetric LV data (4D flow CMR: Spearman's rho = 0.86 at the aortic valve level and 0.90 at the ascending aorta level; 2D flow CMR: 0.67 at aortic valve level; LV measurements: 0.77). In addition, there tended to be a correlation between mean pulmonary artery flow and aorta flow with 4D flow (Spearman's rho = 0.65, P = 0.07), which was absent in measurements obtained with 2D flow CMR (Spearman's rho = 0.40, P = 0.33). This study shows that aorta flow can be accurately measured by 4D flow CMR compared to simultaneously measured invasive flow. This helps to further validate the quantitative reliability of this technique.
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.