Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36568555›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022

Advances in machine learning applications for cardiovascular 4D flow MRI.

Eva S Peper, Pim van Ooij, Bernd Jung, Adrian Huber, Christoph Gräni, Jessica A M Bastiaansen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Unraveling diurnal and technical variability in cerebral hemodynamics from neurovascular 4D-Flow MRI.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Eva S PeperDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Pim van OoijDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Bernd JungDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Adrian HuberDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Christoph GräniDepartment of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Jessica A M BastiaansenDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
University Hospital of Bern · CHWilhelmina Children's Hospital · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has evolved as a non-invasive imaging technique to visualize and quantify blood flow in the heart and vessels. Hemodynamic parameters derived from 4D flow MRI, such as net flow and peak velocities, but also kinetic energy, turbulent kinetic energy, viscous energy loss, and wall shear stress have shown to be of diagnostic relevance for cardiovascular diseases. 4D flow MRI, however, has several limitations. Its long acquisition times and its limited spatio-temporal resolutions lead to inaccuracies in velocity measurements in small and low-flow vessels and near the vessel wall. Additionally, 4D flow MRI requires long post-processing times, since inaccuracies due to the measurement process need to be corrected for and parameter quantification requires 2D and 3D contour drawing. Several machine learning (ML) techniques have been proposed to overcome these limitations. Existing scan acceleration methods have been extended using ML for image reconstruction and ML based super-resolution methods have been used to assimilate high-resolution computational fluid dynamic simulations and 4D flow MRI, which leads to more realistic velocity results. ML efforts have also focused on the automation of other post-processing steps, by learning phase corrections and anti-aliasing. To automate contour drawing and 3D segmentation, networks such as the U-Net have been widely applied. This review summarizes the latest ML advances in 4D flow MRI with a focus on technical aspects and applications. It is divided into the current status of fast and accurate 4D flow MRI data generation, ML based post-processing tools for phase correction and vessel delineation and the statistical evaluation of blood flow.

Indexed as

4D flow4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonanceartificial intelligencefour-dimensional flow imagingmachine learning (ML)

Identifiers

PMID36568555
PMCPMC9780299
OpenAlexW4311947498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.