ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2026
FlowVN Trained on a Single Dataset Enables Rapid Reconstruction of Highly Accelerated 4D Flow MRI Across Multiple Sites.
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
purposeThe aim of this study is to evaluate a deep variational network, FlowVN, for the reconstruction of heavily undersampled 4D Flow MRI across multiple sites.
methodsFlowVN was trained on fully sampled 4D Flow MRI datasets of healthy volunteers from one site. The model was tested on retrospective undersampled data (R = 6-22) of six normal volunteers from the same site and six from another site, prospectively undersampled data (R = 12.4-13.8) of six healthy volunteers from the second site and six patients with aortic stenosis from first Site. Performance was evaluated using nRMSE, relative and angular error, average and maximum velocity, flow rate, volumetric flow, and turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), with a Wilcoxon signed-rank test to assess the difference from ground truth.
resultsFlowVN showed minimal sensitivity to the number of training datasets and performed well even when trained on a single dataset. FlowVN also demonstrated good generalizability across sites. No significant difference in average and maximum velocity was observed up to R = 16. Total TKE was preserved up to R = 10 in the normal volunteers, but was well preserved even at higher acceleration factors in the aortic stenosis patients. Flow volumes through the ascending and descending aorta were well preserved for all acceleration factors, although ascending aorta flow volumes for data from one site were significantly different from ground truth for AF > 16.
conclusionFlowVN accurately reconstructs highly undersampled 4D Flow MRI from multiple sites using a model trained on a single dataset, maintaining excellent quantitative image quality even at very high acceleration factors.
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.