Cargando…

Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification

PURPOSE: To assess errors associated with EPI‐accelerated intracardiac 4D flow MRI (4DEPI) with EPI factor 5, compared with non‐EPI gradient echo (4DGRE). METHODS: Three 3T MRI experiments were performed comparing 4DEPI to 4DGRE: steady flow through straight tubes, pulsatile flow in a left‐ventricle...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Westenberg, Jos J. M., van Assen, Hans C., van den Boogaard, Pieter J., Goeman, Jelle J., Saaid, Hicham, Voorneveld, Jason, Bosch, Johan, Kenjeres, Sasa, Claessens, Tom, Garg, Pankaj, Kouwenhoven, Marc, Lamb, Hildo J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9300143/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34866236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.29112
_version_ 1784751143733166080
author Westenberg, Jos J. M.
van Assen, Hans C.
van den Boogaard, Pieter J.
Goeman, Jelle J.
Saaid, Hicham
Voorneveld, Jason
Bosch, Johan
Kenjeres, Sasa
Claessens, Tom
Garg, Pankaj
Kouwenhoven, Marc
Lamb, Hildo J.
author_facet Westenberg, Jos J. M.
van Assen, Hans C.
van den Boogaard, Pieter J.
Goeman, Jelle J.
Saaid, Hicham
Voorneveld, Jason
Bosch, Johan
Kenjeres, Sasa
Claessens, Tom
Garg, Pankaj
Kouwenhoven, Marc
Lamb, Hildo J.
author_sort Westenberg, Jos J. M.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To assess errors associated with EPI‐accelerated intracardiac 4D flow MRI (4DEPI) with EPI factor 5, compared with non‐EPI gradient echo (4DGRE). METHODS: Three 3T MRI experiments were performed comparing 4DEPI to 4DGRE: steady flow through straight tubes, pulsatile flow in a left‐ventricle phantom, and intracardiac flow in 10 healthy volunteers. For each experiment, 4DEPI was repeated with readout and blip phase‐encoding gradient in different orientations, parallel or perpendicular to the flow direction. In vitro flow rates were compared with timed volumetric collection. In the left‐ventricle phantom and in vivo, voxel‐based speed and spatio‐temporal median speed were compared between sequences, as well as mitral and aortic transvalvular net forward volume. RESULTS: In steady‐flow phantoms, the flow rate error was largest (12%) for high velocity (>2 m/s) with 4DEPI readout gradient parallel to the flow. Voxel‐based speed and median speed in the left‐ventricle phantom were ≤5.5% different between sequences. In vivo, mean net forward volume inconsistency was largest (6.4 ± 8.5%) for 4DEPI with nonblip phase‐encoding gradient parallel to the main flow. The difference in median speed for 4DEPI versus 4DGRE was largest (9%) when the 4DEPI readout gradient was parallel to the flow. CONCLUSIONS: Velocity and flow rate are inaccurate for 4DEPI with EPI factor 5 when flow is parallel to the readout or blip phase‐encoding gradient. However, mean differences in flow rate, voxel‐based speed, and spatio‐temporal median speed were acceptable (≤10%) when comparing 4DEPI to 4DGRE for intracardiac flow in healthy volunteers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9300143
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93001432022-07-21 Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification Westenberg, Jos J. M. van Assen, Hans C. van den Boogaard, Pieter J. Goeman, Jelle J. Saaid, Hicham Voorneveld, Jason Bosch, Johan Kenjeres, Sasa Claessens, Tom Garg, Pankaj Kouwenhoven, Marc Lamb, Hildo J. Magn Reson Med Research Articles—Preclinical and Clinical Imaging PURPOSE: To assess errors associated with EPI‐accelerated intracardiac 4D flow MRI (4DEPI) with EPI factor 5, compared with non‐EPI gradient echo (4DGRE). METHODS: Three 3T MRI experiments were performed comparing 4DEPI to 4DGRE: steady flow through straight tubes, pulsatile flow in a left‐ventricle phantom, and intracardiac flow in 10 healthy volunteers. For each experiment, 4DEPI was repeated with readout and blip phase‐encoding gradient in different orientations, parallel or perpendicular to the flow direction. In vitro flow rates were compared with timed volumetric collection. In the left‐ventricle phantom and in vivo, voxel‐based speed and spatio‐temporal median speed were compared between sequences, as well as mitral and aortic transvalvular net forward volume. RESULTS: In steady‐flow phantoms, the flow rate error was largest (12%) for high velocity (>2 m/s) with 4DEPI readout gradient parallel to the flow. Voxel‐based speed and median speed in the left‐ventricle phantom were ≤5.5% different between sequences. In vivo, mean net forward volume inconsistency was largest (6.4 ± 8.5%) for 4DEPI with nonblip phase‐encoding gradient parallel to the main flow. The difference in median speed for 4DEPI versus 4DGRE was largest (9%) when the 4DEPI readout gradient was parallel to the flow. CONCLUSIONS: Velocity and flow rate are inaccurate for 4DEPI with EPI factor 5 when flow is parallel to the readout or blip phase‐encoding gradient. However, mean differences in flow rate, voxel‐based speed, and spatio‐temporal median speed were acceptable (≤10%) when comparing 4DEPI to 4DGRE for intracardiac flow in healthy volunteers. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-12-05 2022-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9300143/ /pubmed/34866236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.29112 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Articles—Preclinical and Clinical Imaging
Westenberg, Jos J. M.
van Assen, Hans C.
van den Boogaard, Pieter J.
Goeman, Jelle J.
Saaid, Hicham
Voorneveld, Jason
Bosch, Johan
Kenjeres, Sasa
Claessens, Tom
Garg, Pankaj
Kouwenhoven, Marc
Lamb, Hildo J.
Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification
title Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification
title_full Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification
title_fullStr Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification
title_full_unstemmed Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification
title_short Echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4D flow MRI quantification
title_sort echo planar imaging–induced errors in intracardiac 4d flow mri quantification
topic Research Articles—Preclinical and Clinical Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9300143/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34866236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.29112
work_keys_str_mv AT westenbergjosjm echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT vanassenhansc echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT vandenboogaardpieterj echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT goemanjellej echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT saaidhicham echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT voorneveldjason echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT boschjohan echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT kenjeressasa echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT claessenstom echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT gargpankaj echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT kouwenhovenmarc echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification
AT lambhildoj echoplanarimaginginducederrorsinintracardiac4dflowmriquantification