Karin Markenroth Bloch1, Jonas Svensson2, Mariam Al-Mashat3, Marcus Carlsson3, and Danielle van Westen4
1Lund University Bioimaging Center, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, 2Dept. of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, 3Lund University, Dept. of Clinical Sciences Lund, Clinical Physiology, Skane University Hospital, Lund, Sweden, 4Dept. of Diagnostic Radiology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
Synopsis
Quantifying the total blood supply to the brain and
relating that to brain tissue mass gives a measure of global cerebral blood flow (CBFglo).
The cerebral blood flow can be measured using phase contrast MRI in the
supplying arteries. For accuracy, separate 2D flow measurements for each vessel
has been recommended. An alternative is to use one 4D flow measurement that
covers all vessels of interest and allows flexible definition of measurement planes. The aim of this work is to compare the flow results obtained from a single
2D flow measurement to those from a 4D flow scan.
Introduction
A global
measure of cerebral blood flow (CBFglo) can be obtained by determining
the ratio of the total supplying blood flow to the brain tissue mass. The total
blood flow to the brain is obtained by summing the flow in the internal carotid
arteries (ICA) and vertebral arteries (VA) as measured by phase contrast MRI, and the mass can be obtained from estimates of brain volume from
morphological MRI images. The method has for example been used to measure the metabolic
rate in the brain [1, 2], and an analogous technique is used to assess global
myocardial blood flow [3]. As the anatomy of the vessels in the neck varies, it is challenging to place one slice that is perpendicular to all vessels. Therefore, separate
2D flow measurements in each vessel have been recommended [2]. An alternative
could be to instead use a 4D flow scan that covers all vessels of
interest and allows for flexible definition of measurement planes. The aim of
this work is therefore to compare flow results obtained from a single 2D flow
measurement with throughplane velocity encoding with those from a 4D flow scan where the three velocity components are encoded.Methods
Eleven subjects were scanned on a 3T MRI
system (Skyra, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany). For the 2D flow
measurement, the retrospectively triggered clinical routine scan was used. To reduce
the scan time, the 4D flow was acquired without cardiac triggering, see below. The
number of averages were adjusted to get comparable SNR. Sequence parameters are given in Figure 1. Both sequences were positioned on a TOF-angio, placing the
2D slice at a suitable location above the carotid bifurcation and below the
skull base, and the 4D slab with its lowest slice at the bifurcation (fig. 2a). The 4D overlapped
the 2D slice in all cases but two, and in these cases there was no suitable
positioning for the 2D slice within the 4D slab. Data processing was performed
in GTFlow (Gyrotools, Zürich, Switzerland), and included linear phase
correction using stationary tissue. For each data set, six vessels were defined:
right and left ICA, right and left VA, and right and left jugular vein (JV) (fig. 2b). In
all, 62 vessels were measured (4 vessels were not identified, presumably due to
anatomical variation). For 2D flow, the average flow over the cardiac cycle was
computed for each vessel, and was compared with the flow for the corresponding
vessel in the 4D flow dataset. In the 4D flow data, vessel ROIs were placed
perpendicular to the vessels on the angiograms (Fig. 2c).Results
The 2D
and 4D flow measurements correlate well (r2=0.75, Fig. 3). However, in
4 of the vessels the difference was larger than 75%, discrepancies that were
due to malpositioning of the 2D slice (3 cases) or inadequate resolution to
separate adjacent vessels in the 2D flow data (one case). After removing the
outliers, the correlation improved (r2=0.83, fig. 3). When excluding
the outliers, a Bland-Altman analysis showed a positive bias for the 2D flow data
(bias=0.76, fig. 4). The bias was retained when comparing per vessel (fig. 5).Discussion
Use of
4D flow data allows for an optimal ROI position for each vessel, regardless of
the specific vessel geometries. This greatly facilitates planning, and removes
any need for repeated scans. In addition, 4D flow data acquisition provides
an isotropic, high-resolution data set in a clinically acceptable scan time.
Use of non-triggered 4D flow data is supported by the results in [2], showing
that the 2D flow results can be compared between triggered and untriggered scans, as
well as by in-house tests.Conclusions
Flow
results based on 4D flow data can be used to estimate global blood supply to
the brain. The advantages of 4D flow over 2D flow are ease of slab positioning
and the flexible ROI selection, thereby reducing the number of flawed
measurements due to malpositioning. For correctly positioned measurement planes,
we found a small positive bias for 2D flow data.Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the skilled assistance of radiographers Amir Vahabi and Makda Haile Michael at Skane University hospital.References
[1] F. Xu et al., MRM:62, p.141 (2009)
[2] P. Y. Liu et al., MRM:69,
p.675 (2013)
[3] K. Markenroth Bloch et al., BMC MI:9, p.9
(2009)