A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.
A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/mrm.28698
复制
发表时间：
2021-07
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Wieben O
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Corrado PA;Medero R;Johnson KM;François CJ;Roldán-Alzate A;Wieben O
径向采样是加速4D血流MRI采集的一种方法，使左心室（LV）中慢血流的双Venc评估可行。在这里，两个径向轨迹进行了比较，在体外的应用：三维径向（PC-VIPR）与堆栈的明星（PC-SOS），与台式粒子成像测速仪（PIV）作为参考标准。该研究包括三个步骤：1）从健康成人的CT图像构建MRI和PIV兼容的LV模型。2)使用脉动流泵的体外PIV。3)使用PC-VIPR和PC-SOS的体外双Venc 4D血流MRI（2次重复实验）。将每个MR图像集回顾性欠采样至5个有效扫描持续时间，并与PIV参考进行比较。比较MRI和PIV图像之间的均方根速度矢量差（RMSE），沿着动能（KE）和壁面切应力（WSS）。两次MR采集的RMSE均随着扫描时间的减少而增加。在30分钟扫描中，PC-SOS图像的RMSE比PC-VIPR图像低3%（3.8与3.9 cm/s），但在2.5分钟扫描中高98%（9.5与4.8 cm/s）。PIV会话内可重复性显示RMSE为4.4cm/s，反映了心跳间的流量变化，而MRI的VIPR/SOS会话间RMSE分别为3.8/3.5 cm/s。对于VIPR/SOS，相对于PIV，30分钟MRI扫描中的速度、KE和WSS分别高估了0.4/0.3cm/s、0.2/0.1 μJ/mL和36/43 mPa。PIV可用于特定应用的4D Flow MRI方案优化。PC-VIPR更适合于扫描时间短的双Venc LV成像。
Radial sampling is one method to accelerate 4D flow MRI acquisition, making feasible dual-Venc assessment of slow flow in the left ventricle (LV). Here, two radial trajectories are compared in-vitro for this application: 3D radial (PC-VIPR) versus stack of stars (PC-SOS), with benchtop particle imaging velocimetry (PIV) serving as a reference standard. The study contained three steps: 1) Construction of an MRI- and PIV-compatible LV model from a healthy adult’s CT images. 2) In-vitro PIV using a pulsatile flow pump. 3) In-vitro dual-Venc 4D flow MRI using PC-VIPR and PC-SOS (2 repeat experiments). Each MR image set was retrospectively undersampled to 5 effective scan durations and compared with the PIV reference. The root-mean-square velocity vector difference (RMSE) between MRI and PIV images was compared, along with kinetic energy (KE) and wall shear stress (WSS). RMSE increased as scan time decreased for both MR acquisitions. RMSE was 3% lower in PC-SOS images than PC-VIPR images in 30-minute scans (3.8 vs. 3.9 cm/s) but 98% higher in 2.5-minute scans (9.5 vs. 4.8 cm/s). PIV intrasession repeatability showed a RMSE of 4.4cm/s, reflecting beat-to-beat flow variation, while MRI had intersession RMSE’s of 3.8/3.5 cm/s for VIPR/SOS, respectively. Speed, KE, and WSS were overestimated voxel-wise in 30-minute MRI scans relative to PIV by 0.4/0.3cm/s, 0.2/0.1 μJ/mL, and 36/43 mPa, respectively for VIPR/SOS. PIV is feasible for application-specific 4D flow MRI protocol optimization. PC-VIPR is better-suited to dual-Venc LV imaging with short scan times.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1186/s12968-015-0172-7
发表时间：
2015-08-09
期刊：
Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
影响因子：
--
作者：
Nayak KS;Nielsen JF;Bernstein MA;Markl M;D Gatehouse P;M Botnar R;Saloner D;Lorenz C;Wen H;S Hu B;Epstein FH;N Oshinski J;Raman SV
通讯作者：
Raman SV
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Busch, Julia;Giese, Daniel;Kozerke, Sebastian
通讯作者：
Kozerke, Sebastian
影响因子：
7.5
作者：
Lopez, Jose A.;Chen, Junmei
通讯作者：
Chen, Junmei
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Pahlavian, Soroush Heidari;Bunck, Alexander C.;Martin, Bryn A.
通讯作者：
Martin, Bryn A.
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
Ruedinger, Katrina L.;Medero, Rafael;Roldan-Alzate, Alejandro
通讯作者：
Roldan-Alzate, Alejandro