ArticleScientific reports2025
Arterial-optimized 4D-flow MRI for quantifying flow and pulsatility in venous sinuses and large cerebral veins.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A single, arterial-optimized 4D-flow MRI acquisition may enable fast assessment of both cerebral arterial and venous flow. However, arteries and veins require different velocity encoding (VENC) settings for optimal velocity-to-noise ratio (VNR). Consequently, venous measurements using arterial-optimized VENC settings are subject to reduced VNR and require further evaluation. This study compared cerebral venous flow and pulsatility assessments using a high-VENC (110 cm/s, adapted to the arterial system) and a low-VENC (40 cm/s, adapted to the venous system) 4D-flow MRI sequence at 3 Tesla. Flow and pulsatility index (PI) were calculated for cerebral veins, sinuses and internal jugular veins in 36 elderly volunteers (79 ± 5 years). The high-VENC acquisitions allowed visualization of nearly all venous structures. Mean flow differences were small and the correlation, strong, when comparing both acquisitions across sinuses (R = 0.90-0.99, difference = -8-7%) and cortical veins (R = 0.93, difference = - 6%). Inflow-outflow differences at the confluence of sinuses were similar between acquisitions. PI showed moderate to strong agreement except in the straight sinus. Both the vein of Galen and the jugular veins suffered from aliasing in the venous VENC acquisitions. In summary, this study demonstrated that a VENC setting adapted for the arterial cerebral circulation was feasible for studying cerebral venous flow and pulsatility.
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.