ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2026
3D Phase Contrast Using Balanced Steady-State Free Precession (PC-SSFP) for Improved 4D Flow at Clinical Field Strengths.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose4D flow MRI provides comprehensive evaluation of cardiovascular flow. One major limitation of intracardiac 4D flow is poor blood-myocardial contrast. 2D phase contrast using balanced steady state free precession (PC-SSFP) methods have been demonstrated to provide accurate velocity, with enhanced contrast and SNR. In this work, we extended our 2D PC-SSFP to 4D flow at clinical field strengths, and tested it for diastolic evaluation.
methodsThe 4D flow sequence with four-point encoding was modified to have 0th and 1st moment gradient nulling over each TR to achieve bSSFP contrast. Pixel-wise velocities were validated in a flow phantom at 3 T. Mitral inflow peak velocity (E, A, e') and stroke volume (SV) were compared in 14 scan (13 healthy subjects at 3 T, with one subject scanned again at 1.5 T) with standard 2D and 4D flow GRE methods.
resultsIn phantom study, 4D flow bSSFP strongly agreed with GRE, with r > 0.9 in all three directions. Significantly improved SNR (42.4 ± 24.7 vs. 16.9 ± 8.5) and blood-tissue CNR (9.7 ± 3.3 vs. 2.3 ± 1.5) were found in vivo. 4D flow bSSFP measured comparable E (limits of agreement 1.3 ± 14.6 cm/s, r = 0.88), A (0.3 ± 11.3 cm/s, r = 0.95), e' (1.3 ± 3.4 cm/s, r = 0.71), and SV (-2.6 ± 9.7 mL, r = 0.91) vs. GRE approach, and showed similar agreement with 2D methods (r = 0.64-0.91). A study at 1.5 T suggested its potential applicability at lower field strength, with reduced susceptibility to off-resonance artifacts.
conclusionOur 4D flow bSSFP method is feasible, achieving improved SNR, CNR, and accurately measuring mitral velocity and volume at clinical field strengths.
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.