Purpose The main objective of this study was to develop two-dimensional (2D) phase contrast (PC) methods to quantify the helicity and vorticity of blood flow in the aortic root.Methods This proof... Show morePurpose The main objective of this study was to develop two-dimensional (2D) phase contrast (PC) methods to quantify the helicity and vorticity of blood flow in the aortic root.Methods This proof-of-concept study used four-dimensional (4D) flow cardiovascular MR (4D flow CMR) data of five healthy controls, five patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and five patients with aortic stenosis (AS). A PC through-plane generated by 4D flow data was treated as a 2D PC plane and compared with the original 4D flow. Visual assessment of flow vectors was used to assess helicity and vorticity. We quantified flow displacement (FD), systolic flow reversal ratio (sFRR) and rotational angle (RA) using 2D PC.Results For visual vortex flow presence near the inner curvature of the ascending aortic root on 4D flow CMR, sFRR demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.955, p<0.001. A threshold of >8% for sFRR had a sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 100% for visual vortex presence. In addition, the average late systolic FD, a marker of flow eccentricity, also demonstrated an AUC of 0.909, p<0.001 for visual vortex flow. Manual systolic rotational flow angle change (ΔsRA) demonstrated excellent association with semiautomated ΔsRA (r=0.99, 95% CI 0.9907 to 0.999, p<0.001). In reproducibility testing, average systolic FD (FDsavg) showed a minimal bias at 1.28% with a high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC=0.92). Similarly, sFRR had a minimal bias of 1.14% with an ICC of 0.96. ΔsRA demonstrated an acceptable bias of 5.72°—and an ICC of 0.99.Conclusion 2D PC flow imaging can possibly quantify blood flow helicity (ΔRA) and vorticity (FRR). These imaging biomarkers of flow helicity and vorticity demonstrate high reproducibility for clinical adoption. Show less
BackgroundMeasurement of peak velocities is important in the evaluation of heart failure. This study compared the performance of automated 4D flow cardiac MRI (CMR) with traditional transthoracic... Show moreBackgroundMeasurement of peak velocities is important in the evaluation of heart failure. This study compared the performance of automated 4D flow cardiac MRI (CMR) with traditional transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTE) for the measurement of mitral inflow peak diastolic velocities.MethodsPatients with Doppler echocardiography and 4D flow cardiac magnetic resonance data were included retrospectively. An established automated technique was used to segment the left ventricular transvalvular flow using short-axis cine stack of images. Peak mitral E-wave and peak mitral A-wave velocities were automatically derived using in-plane velocity maps of transvalvular flow. Additionally, we checked the agreement between peak mitral E-wave velocity derived by 4D flow CMR and Doppler echocardiography in patients with sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation (AF) separately.ResultsForty-eight patients were included (median age 69 years, IQR 63 to 76; 46% female). Data were split into three groups according to heart rhythm. The median peak E-wave mitral inflow velocity by automated 4D flow CMR was comparable with Doppler echocardiography in all patients (0.90 +/- 0.43 m/s vs 0.94 +/- 0.48 m/s, P = 0.132), sinus rhythm-only group (0.88 +/- 0.35 m/s vs 0.86 +/- 0.38 m/s, P = 0.54) and in AF-only group (1.33 +/- 0.56 m/s vs 1.18 +/- 0.47 m/s, P = 0.06). Peak A-wave mitral inflow velocity results had no significant difference between Doppler TTE and automated 4D flow CMR (0.81 +/- 0.44 m/s vs 0.81 +/- 0.53 m/s, P = 0.09) in all patients and sinus rhythm-only groups. Automated 4D flow CMR showed a significant correlation with TTE for measurement of peak E-wave in all patients group (r = 0.73, P < 0.001) and peak A-wave velocities (r = 0.88, P < 0.001). Moreover, there was a significant correlation between automated 4D flow CMR and TTE for peak-E wave velocity in sinus rhythm-only patients (r = 0.68, P < 0.001) and AF-only patients (r = 0.81, P = 0.014). Excellent intra-and inter-observer variability was demonstrated for both parameters.ConclusionAutomated dynamic peak mitral inflow diastolic velocity tracing using 4D flow CMR is comparable to Doppler echocardiography and has excellent repeatability for clinical use. However, 4D flow CMR can potentially underestimate peak velocity in patients with AF. Show less
Increasingly, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has potential as a noninvasive and accessible tool for diagnosing and monitoring gastrointestinal motility in healthy and diseased bowel.... Show moreIncreasingly, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has potential as a noninvasive and accessible tool for diagnosing and monitoring gastrointestinal motility in healthy and diseased bowel. However, current MRI methods of measuring bowel motility have limitations: requiring bowel preparation or long acquisition times; providing mainly surrogate measures of motion; and estimating bowel-wall movement in just two dimensions. In this proof-of-concept study we apply a method that provides a quantitative measure of motion within the bowel, in both two and three dimensions, using existing, vendor-implemented MRI pulse sequences with minimal bowel preparation. This method uses a minimised cost function to fit linear vectors in the spatial and temporal domains. It is sensitised to the spatial scale of the bowel and aims to address issues relating to the low signal-to-noise in high-temporal resolution dynamic MRI scans, previously compensated for by performing thick-slice (10-mm) two-dimensional (2D) coronal scans. We applied both 2D and three-dimensional (3D) scanning protocols in two healthy volunteers. For 2D scanning, analysis yielded bi-modal velocity peaks, with a mean antegrade motion of 5.5 mm/s and an additional peak at similar to 9 mm/s corresponding to longitudinal peristalsis, as supported by intraoperative data from the literature. Furthermore, 3D scans indicated a mean forward motion of 4.7 mm/s, and degrees of antegrade and retrograde motion were also established. These measures show promise for the noninvasive assessment of bowel motility, and have the potential to be tuned to particular regions of interest and behaviours within the bowel. Show less
