Highly accelerated aortic 4D flow MRI using compressed sensing: Performance at different acceleration factors in patients with aortic disease.
Highly accelerated aortic 4D flow MRI using compressed sensing: Performance at different acceleration factors in patients with aortic disease.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/mrm.28561
复制
发表时间：
2021-04
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Markl M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pathrose A;Ma L;Berhane H;Scott MB;Chow K;Forman C;Jin N;Serhal A;Avery R;Carr J;Markl M
系统评估高加速压缩感知 (CS) 4D 血流 MRI 框架在三个不同加速因子 (R) 下的可行性和性能，用于量化主动脉疾病患者的主动脉血流动力学和壁剪切应力 (WSS)。 20 名主动脉疾病患者（58 ± 15 岁；19 M）接受了四次 4D 血流扫描：一项传统扫描（GRAPPA，R = 2）和三项 CS 4D 血流扫描，R = 5.7、7.7 和 10.2。所有扫描均在 1.5T 扫描仪上使用等效成像参数获得。对升主动脉 (AAo)、弓和降主动脉 (DAo) 的峰值收缩速度 (Vmax)、峰值流量 (Qmax) 和净流量 (Qnet) 进行量化。 WSS 是在 AAo 和足弓内的六个区域进行计算的。 R = 5.7、7.7 和 10.2 的常规流和 CS 4D 流的平均扫描时间分别为 9:58 ± 2:58 分钟、3:40 ± 1:19 分钟、2:50 ± 0:56 分钟和 2:05 ± 0:42 分钟。所有 CS 协议均显着低估了 Vmax、Qmax 和 Qnet（CS 低估≤ -7%、-9% 和 -10%，R 分别 = 5.7、7.7 和 10.2）。 WSS 测量显示所有 CS 协议的低估程度最高（CS 低估≤ -9%、-12% 和 -14%，R = 5.7、7.7 和 10.2）。尽管系统性地低估了各种血流动力学参数，但 R = 5.7、7.7 和 10.2 时的高度加速主动脉 CS 4D 血流与传统 4D 血流表现出中等程度的一致性。尽管在解释结果时应考虑潜在的血流动力学低估，但缩短的扫描时间可能有助于 CS 4D 血流的临床转化。
To systematically assess the feasibility and performance of a highly accelerated compressed sensing (CS) 4D flow MRI framework at three different acceleration factors (R) for the quantification of aortic flow dynamics and wall shear stress (WSS) in patients with aortic disease. Twenty patients with aortic disease (58 ± 15 y old; 19 M) underwent four 4D flow scans: one conventional (GRAPPA, R = 2) and three CS 4D flows with R = 5.7, 7.7, and 10.2. All scans were acquired with otherwise equivalent imaging parameters on a 1.5T scanner. Peak-systolic velocity (Vmax), peak flow (Qmax), and net flow (Qnet) were quantified at the ascending aorta (AAo), arch, and descending aorta (DAo). WSS was calculated at six regions within the AAo and arch. Mean scan times for the conventional and CS 4D flows with R = 5.7, 7.7, and 10.2 were 9:58 ± 2:58 min, 3:40 ± 1:19 min, 2:50 ± 0:56 min, and 2:05 ± 0:42 min, respectively. Vmax, Qmax, and Qnet were significantly underestimated by all CS protocols (underestimation ≤ −7%, −9%, and −10% by CS, R = 5.7, 7.7, and 10.2, respectively). WSS measurements showed the highest underestimation by all CS protocols (underestimation ≤ −9%, −12%, and −14% by CS, R = 5.7, 7.7, and 10.2). Highly accelerated aortic CS 4D flow at R = 5.7, 7.7, and 10.2 showed moderate agreement with the conventional 4D flow, despite systematically underestimating various hemodynamic parameters. The shortened scan time may enable the clinical translation of CS 4D flow, although potential hemodynamic underestimation should be considered when interpreting the results.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Busch, Julia;Giese, Daniel;Kozerke, Sebastian
通讯作者：
Kozerke, Sebastian
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Jarvis, Kelly;Pruijssen, Judith T.;Markl, Michael
通讯作者：
Markl, Michael
影响因子：
6.4
作者：
Driessen, Mieke M. P.;Schings, Marjolijn A.;Leiner, Tim
通讯作者：
Leiner, Tim
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Hassanabad, Ali Fatehi;Burns, Fiona;Garcia, Julio
通讯作者：
Garcia, Julio
DOI：
10.1016/j.mric.2014.08.006
发表时间：
2015-02-01
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
Burris, Nicholas S.;Hope, Michael D.
通讯作者：
Hope, Michael D.