dc.contributor.author
Wiesemann, Stephanie
dc.contributor.author
Schmitter, Sebastian
dc.contributor.author
Demir, Aylin
dc.contributor.author
Prothmann, Marcel
dc.contributor.author
Schwenke, Carsten
dc.contributor.author
Chawla, Ashish
dc.contributor.author
Knobelsdorff‐Brenkenhoff, Florian von
dc.contributor.author
Greiser, Andreas
dc.contributor.author
Jin, Ning
dc.contributor.author
Bollache, Emilie
dc.contributor.author
Markl, Michael
dc.contributor.author
Schulz‐Menger, Jeanette
dc.date.accessioned
2022-03-03T09:02:15Z
dc.date.available
2022-03-03T09:02:15Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/34303
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-34020
dc.description.abstract
Purpose: 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (4D-MRI) allows time-resolved visualization of blood flow patterns, quantification of volumes, velocities, and advanced parameters, such as wall shear stress (WSS). As 4D-MRI enters the clinical arena, standardization and awareness of confounders are important. Our aim was to evaluate the equivalence of 4D flow-derived aortic hemodynamics in healthy volunteers using different sequences and field strengths.
Methods: 4D-MRI was acquired in 10 healthy volunteers at 1.5T using three different prototype sequences, at 3T and at 7T (Siemens Healthineers). After evaluation of diagnostic quality in three segments (ascending-, descending aorta, aortic arch), peak velocity, flow volumes, and WSS were investigated. Equivalence limits for comparison of field strengths/sequences were based on the limits of Bland-Altman analyses of the intraobserver variability.
Results: Non-diagnostic quality was found in 10/144 segments, 9/10 were obtained at 7T. Apart for the comparison of forward flow between sequence 1 and 3, the differences in measurements between field strengths/sequences exceeded the range of agreement. Significant differences were found between field strengths/sequences for forward flow (1.5T vs. 3T, 3T vs. 7T, sequence 1 vs. 3, 2 vs. 3 [P < .001]), WSS (1.5T vs. 3T [P < .05], sequence 1 vs. 2, 1 vs. 3, 2 vs. 3 [P < .001]), and peak velocity (1.5T vs. 7T, sequence 1 vs. 3 [P > .001]). All parameters at all field strengths/with all sequences correlated moderately to strongly (r ≥ 0.5).
Conclusion: Data from all sequences could be acquired and resulting images showed sufficient quality for further analysis. However, the variability of the measurements of peak velocity, flow volumes, and WSS was higher when comparing field strengths/sequences as the equivalence limits defined by the intraobserver assessments.
en
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.subject
cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging
en
dc.subject
non-invasive hemodynamics
en
dc.subject
standardization
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.title
Impact of sequence type and field strength (1.5, 3, and 7T) on 4D flow MRI hemodynamic aortic parameters in healthy volunteers
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1002/mrm.28450
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
2
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
Wiley
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart
721
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend
733
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
85
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
refubium.funding
DEAL Wiley
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid
32754969
dcterms.isPartOf.issn
0740-3194
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
1522-2594