Data Quality and Optimal Background Correction Order of Respiratory-Gated k-Space Segmented Spoiled Gradient Echo (SGRE) and Echo Planar Imaging (EPI)-Based 4D Flow MRI.
4D flow MRI
background phase offsets
data quality
echo-planar imaging
phase contrast CMR
spoiled gradient echo
Journal
Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI
ISSN: 1522-2586
Titre abrégé: J Magn Reson Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9105850
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
27
02
2019
revised:
10
07
2019
accepted:
10
07
2019
pubmed:
25
7
2019
medline:
15
5
2021
entrez:
24
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A reduction in scan time of 4D Flow MRI would facilitate clinical application. A recent study indicates that echo-planar imaging (EPI) 4D Flow MRI allows for a reduction in scan time and better data quality than the recommended k-space segmented spoiled gradient echo (SGRE) sequence. It was argued that the poor data quality of SGRE was related to the nonrecommended absence of respiratory motion compensation. However, data quality can also be affected by the background offset compensation. To compare the data quality of respiratory motion-compensated SGRE and EPI 4D Flow MRI and their dependence on background correction (BC) order. Retrospective. Eighteen healthy subjects (eight female, mean age 32 ± 5 years). 1.5 T. [Correction added on July 26, 2019, after first online publication: The preceding field strength was corrected.] SGRE and EPI-based 4D Flow MRI. Data quality was investigated visually and by comparing flows through the cardiac valves and aorta. Measurements were obtained from transvalvular flow and pathline analysis. Linear regression and Bland-Altman analysis were used. Wilcoxon test was used for comparison of visual scoring. Student's t-test was used for comparison of flow volumes. No significant difference was found by visual inspection (P = 0.08). Left ventricular (LV) flows were strongly and very strongly associated with SGRE and EPI, respectively (R Both sequences yielded good internal data consistency when an adequate background correction was applied. Second and first BC order were considered sufficient for transvalvular flow analysis in SGRE and EPI, respectively. Higher BC orders were preferred for particle tracing. Level of Evidence 4 Technical Efficacy Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:885-896.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A reduction in scan time of 4D Flow MRI would facilitate clinical application. A recent study indicates that echo-planar imaging (EPI) 4D Flow MRI allows for a reduction in scan time and better data quality than the recommended k-space segmented spoiled gradient echo (SGRE) sequence. It was argued that the poor data quality of SGRE was related to the nonrecommended absence of respiratory motion compensation. However, data quality can also be affected by the background offset compensation.
PURPOSE
To compare the data quality of respiratory motion-compensated SGRE and EPI 4D Flow MRI and their dependence on background correction (BC) order.
STUDY TYPE
Retrospective.
SUBJECTS
Eighteen healthy subjects (eight female, mean age 32 ± 5 years).
FIELD STRENGTH AND SEQUENCE
1.5 T. [Correction added on July 26, 2019, after first online publication: The preceding field strength was corrected.] SGRE and EPI-based 4D Flow MRI.
ASSESSMENT
Data quality was investigated visually and by comparing flows through the cardiac valves and aorta. Measurements were obtained from transvalvular flow and pathline analysis.
STATISTICAL TESTS
Linear regression and Bland-Altman analysis were used. Wilcoxon test was used for comparison of visual scoring. Student's t-test was used for comparison of flow volumes.
RESULTS
No significant difference was found by visual inspection (P = 0.08). Left ventricular (LV) flows were strongly and very strongly associated with SGRE and EPI, respectively (R
DATA CONCLUSION
Both sequences yielded good internal data consistency when an adequate background correction was applied. Second and first BC order were considered sufficient for transvalvular flow analysis in SGRE and EPI, respectively. Higher BC orders were preferred for particle tracing. Level of Evidence 4 Technical Efficacy Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:885-896.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31332874
doi: 10.1002/jmri.26879
pmc: PMC7027768
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
885-896Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
Références
J Magn Reson Imaging. 1995 Nov-Dec;5(6):656-62
pubmed: 8748482
J Magn Reson Imaging. 1993 May-Jun;3(3):521-30
pubmed: 8324312
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010 Feb 12;12:9
pubmed: 20152026
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013 Jan;37(1):208-16
pubmed: 22976284
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012 Apr 27;14:25
pubmed: 22541134
Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;12(8):1255-62
pubmed: 7854031
Magn Reson Med. 1999 Apr;41(4):793-9
pubmed: 10332856
Radiology. 2008 Dec;249(3):792-800
pubmed: 18849503
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2005 Mar;27(3):462-6; discussion 467
pubmed: 15740956
Magn Reson Med. 2016 Jan;75(1):115-25
pubmed: 25684112
Acad Radiol. 2014 Aug;21(8):1002-8
pubmed: 25018072
Magn Reson Med. 2016 Jan;75(1):196-206
pubmed: 25684309
MAGMA. 1995 Jul;3(2):59-66
pubmed: 7496887
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2015 Aug 10;17:72
pubmed: 26257141
Magn Reson Med. 2005 Dec;54(6):1430-8
pubmed: 16276492
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005 Jul;22(1):73-9
pubmed: 15971181
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Jul;28(1):210-8
pubmed: 18581344
Radiology. 2010 Sep;256(3):724-34
pubmed: 20634432
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010 Mar;31(3):711-8
pubmed: 20187217
Magn Reson Med. 2002 Jun;47(6):1202-10
pubmed: 12111967
Radiology. 1994 Jun;191(3):691-6
pubmed: 8184048
Magn Reson Med. 2018 Jan;79(1):195-207
pubmed: 28266062
BMC Med Imaging. 2010 Jan 11;10:1
pubmed: 20064248
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Jan;47(1):272-281
pubmed: 28470915
Magn Reson Med. 2019 Jun;81(6):3675-3690
pubmed: 30803006
Magn Reson Med. 1999 Nov;42(5):952-62
pubmed: 10542355
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010 Jan 14;12:5
pubmed: 20074359
Magn Reson Med. 2017 Nov;78(5):1877-1882
pubmed: 28074541
Invest Radiol. 2009 Oct;44(10):669-75
pubmed: 19724233
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017 Nov;46(5):1516-1525
pubmed: 28225577
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2007;9(4):681-5
pubmed: 17578724
Magn Reson Med. 2003 Nov;50(5):1031-42
pubmed: 14587014