Shuo Zhang1,2, Jun-Mei Zhang1,3, Jennifer Ann Bryant1, Bao Ru Leong1, Pankaj Garg4, Rob van der Geest5, Ru San Tan1,3, and Liang Zhong1,3
1National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore, 2Philips Healthcare Singapore, Singapore, Singapore, 3Duke-NUS Medical School Singapore, Singapore, Singapore, 4Division of Biomedical Imaging, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom, 5Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
Synopsis
Whole-heart 4D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging
(4D PC-MRI) provides qualitative and quantitative cardiovascular flow
information. Recent technological advances in acquisition have rendered its
clinical adoption without breath hold or respiratory gating. However, with different acquisition methods available their
accuracy and influence in flow measurement are not well studied. We report our
result in comparison of different commercially available imaging pulse
sequences with validation to conventional 2D PC-MRI in healthy volunteers and
patients with congenital heart disease.
Introduction
Whole-heart 4D phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging
(4D PC-MRI) allows qualitative and quantitative assessment of cardiovascular flow.
Recent technological advances have improved the acquisition speed, rendering
its wider clinical adoption even without breath hold or respiratory gating 1.
We aimed to compare
different acquisition methods with commercially available imaging pulse sequences
and with validation to conventional 2D PC-MRI in both healthy volunteers and
patients with congenital heart disease.Methods
All
human subjects underwent MRI on a 3T system (Philips Ingenia). Whole-heart 4D flow
was measured using three different RF-spoiled gradient-echo based pulse
sequences, which included one EPI and two turbo-field-echo (TFE) sequences, all
with velocity encoding applied in three directions. While the spatial and
temporal resolutions were kept similar among these sequences, the combination
of different undersampling strategies in either the phase-encoding dimension (partial
Fourier), echo dimension (partial echo) and cardiac phase dimension (phase percentage)
differed from each other. Detailed imaging parameters were summarized in Table 1. The 3D volume covered the
thorax from apex of the heart to the aortic arch. All 4D flow measurements were
performed with free breathing and without respiratory navigator gating. In
addition, conventional 2D one-directional PC-MRI was performed with (BH) and
without (FB) breath hold, which served as the reference and were compared to
the 4D flow results. The cardiovascular flow was measured at the following
location: 1) the ascending aorta distal to coronary artery orifices (Ao); 2) the
mid portion of the pulmonary trunk (PA); 3) the main stem of the right (RPA)
and 4) left pulmonary artery (LPA) at least 4 mm distal to the bifurcation; 4)
mitral (MV) and tricuspid (TV) valves at the moment of end systole, with the
acquisition plane perpendicular to the diastolic inflow direction. In addition,
regurgitation fractions (RF) in aorta or pulmonary trunk of patients with
malformed and/or insufficient valves were also measured and compared. Data analysis
was performed with the MASS software (Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands) and intra-cardiac kinetic energy and flow components analysis were
also included 2. Statistics was done in SPSS and a P value <0.05
was considered significant.Results and Discussion
4
healthy volunteers (38 ± 7 years, 3 female) and 2 patients (29 ± 3 years, 1
female) with repaired Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) were included. Flow
measurements were successful in all subjects. First of all, 2D flow with and
without breath hold showed no significant difference. Comparison of 2D and 4D
flow was further performed for all free-breathing measurements. In general, EPI
showed best results in terms of agreement to 2D flow for both peak velocity and
flow rate, as well as flow validity in intra-cardiac flow component analysis (Table 2). 4D TFE-1 had the largest
deviation to 2D and 4D EPI, despite a shorter TE with partial echo acquisition expected
for a higher flow accuracy. This may be explained by either the incomplete
sampling of the echo signal or additional eddy current generated, the exact
cause, however, needs to be further investigated. In comparison, 4D TFE-2
showed closer agreement to 2D and 4D EPI with undersampling in the phase-encoding
direction (partial Fourier) but not in the echo dimension (i.e., without
partial echo). Figure 1 demonstrated
a few typical results of the flow curves obtained in a healthy subject.
Qualitative observation was in consistency with the above quantitative findings
that 4D EPI generated smoothest images, particularly for phase difference maps,
while 4D TFE-1 presented most artifacts in both magnitude images and phase
difference maps (arrows), with presence of distortion in flow vector
visualization (arrow head) in comparison to the other two methods (Figure 2).Conclusion
While
commercially available pulse sequences can well depict 4D cardiovascular flow
dynamics and distributions in free breathing and without respiratory
navigation, accuracy and validity do vary depending on the imaging parameters,
in particular, the undersampling approaches. The previously reported 4D EPI
sequence allows for a reasonable qualitative representation and quantitative
accuracy in complex evaluation of cardiovascular hemodynamics. Nevertheless, as
the generated results directly reflect pathophysiological flow conditions, the
imaging parameters should be chosen with care and detailed technical validation
on flow measurement is necessary prior to any clinical studies.Acknowledgements
The study was supported by National Medical Research Council Singapore (NMRC/OFIRG/0018/2016). References
1. Kanski
M et al. BMC Medical Imaging (2015) 15:20.
2. van
der Geest RJ and Garg P. Curr Radiol Rep (2016) 4:38.