A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.

Magnetic resonance in medicine(2021)

引用 5|浏览0
暂无评分
摘要
PURPOSE:Radial sampling is one method to accelerate 4D flow MRI acquisition, making feasible dual-velocity encoding (Venc) assessment of slow flow in the left ventricle (LV). Here, two radial trajectories are compared in vitro for this application: 3D radial (phase-contrast vastly undersampled isotropic projection, PC-VIPR) versus stack of stars (phase-contrast stack of stars, PC-SOS), with benchtop particle imaging velocimetry (PIV) serving as a reference standard. METHODS: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 (two repeat experiments). Each MR image set was retrospectively undersampled to five 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). RESULTS:RMSE increased as scan time decreased for both MR acquisitions. RMSE was 3% lower in PC-SOS images than PC-VIPR images in 30-min scans (3.8 vs. 3.9 cm/s) but 98% higher in 2.5-min scans (9.5 vs. 4.8 cm/s). PIV intrasession repeatability showed a RMSE of 4.4 cm/s, reflecting beat-to-beat flow variation, while MRI had intersession RMSEs of 3.8/3.5 cm/s for VIPR/SOS, respectively. Speed, KE, and WSS were overestimated voxel-wise in 30-min MRI scans relative to PIV by 0.4/0.3 cm/s, 0.2/0.1 μJ/mL, and 36/43 mPa, respectively, for VIPR/SOS. CONCLUSIONS: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.
更多
查看译文
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要