Wen Chen1, Song Yang1, Qian Lu1, Lin Xu1, Yang Fan2, Yong Zhang3, and Changjie Pan3
1Radiology department, Hubei Shiyan Taihe Hospital, Shiyan, China, 2GE healthcare China, Beijing, China, 3Radiology department, Changzhou No2 people hospital, Changzhou, China
Synopsis
Respiratory gating or navigator technique is used in
4D flow imaging to reduce the effect of respiratory motion. Non-respiratory gated 4D flow MRI reduces the overall scan time but may face uncertainty in reproducibility and reliability. In this work, the reliability and reproducibility of non-respiratory gated 4D flow was investigated in 10 patients and 3 different sites in two separate scans. Better measurement consistency was observed intra-site than inter-site. The intra-correlation coefficient results showed excellent to good reproducibility between sites were observed
( ICC > 0.95 for blood flow, ICC > 0.85 for peak).
Bland–Altman analysis also showed great test-retest reliability.
Purpose
To
systematically investigate the multi-site reproducibility, test-retest reliability
and observer variability of non-respiratory gated 4D flow MRI in the thoracic great
vessels for the assessment of blood flow and peak velocity.Introduction
The 4D flow MRI shows
great potential in quantitative assessment of hemodynamic features of other
cardiovascular diseases, especially in the application of congenital heart
diseases [1]. Typically,
respiratory gating or navigator technique is used in 4D flow imaging to reduce
the effect of respiratory motion, which inevitably prolongs the acquisition
time. It could be very challenging for patients with severely illness to
complete the whole scan. It has been further demonstrated that 4D flow MRI
without respiratory gating may reduce the scan time up to 60% compared to those
with respiratory gating [2].
4D flow without respiratory gating holds promises for its widespread clinical
applications, however whether non-respiratory gating may cause additional measurement
disturbance stays unknown. This study is set to investigate the multi-site
reproducibility, test-retest reliability and observer variability of
non-respiratory gated 4D flow MRI.Material and Methods
This study was
approved by the local ethics board and written informed consents were obtained
from all subjects before MRI examinations. Ten healthy subjects (6 males, 4
females, age 264)
without a history of cardiovascular diseases were recruited in this study. All
participants underwent 4D flow MR scan in three sites equipped with the same MR
scanner (MR750w, GE, WI) and eight-channel cardiac coil, all the participants
were scanned twice in two separate visits. The same protocol was followed using
the kat-ARC sequence [3]: TE/TR = 2.1/4.2 ms, flip angle = 8, FOV = 320 x 320
mm, matrix size = 180 x 180, velocity encoding sensitivity along all three
directions = 150 cm/s. A total of 74 axial slices were acquired to cover the
whole chest with a slice thickness = 2.4 mm, which was then interpolated to 1.2mm. Flow analysis of
acquired 4D flow data was performed using the Arterys (Arterys Inc, CA) [4]. For each acquisition,
region of interest (ROI) based
measurements of blood flow (mL/beat) and peak velocity (cm/s) were performed in ascending aorta and pulmonary
artery. ROIs were semi-automatically placed above the valves using Arterys software.
The
coefficients of variance (CVs) were calculated to measure the multicenter (inter-site)
variance and test-retest (intra-site) variance. The multi-center
reproducibility was assessed by two-way mixed effect intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). The test-retest reliability was
evaluated using the Bland-Altman test. The Pearson correlation coefficient was computed
to assess the level of test-retest agreement. Results
The measured blood
flow waveform of one typical volunteer accompanied with the ROIs are shown in
Figure 1, measurements from each scan are summarized in Table 1. CVs of both intra-
and inter-sites scans are shown in Figure 2. It was seen that inter-site measurements tended to have higher CV values than those of intra-site for both blood flow
and peak velocity. Overall, CV values indicated good inter- and intra-site data
consistency. The multi-site reproducibility assessed by ICCs for all
measurements were listed in Table 2. Great multi-site reproducibility was
observed for both blood flow measurements (all ICC values were larger than
0.95). For peak velocity measurements, all ICC values were greater than 0.85, which
indicated good multicenter reproducibility of peak
velocity measurements. In addition, to demonstrate the test–retest
reliability of both blood flow and peak velocity, the Bland–Altman analysis was
used and detailed results were summarized in Table 3. Both
blood flow and peak velocity showed good test–retest agreements in all
measurements (MD < 3%). The Pearson correlation analysis also showed
significant test–retest agreement (all r
> 0.80 and P < 0.001).Discussion and conclusion
Quantitative assessment the hemodynamic properties of blood flow from both aorta and
pulmonary artery is critical for cardiovascular diseases such as valve diseases,
vascular stenosis, vessel wall diseases and even congenital heart diseases. The
progression of 2D PC MRI to 4D flow allows simultaneous visualization of both
relevant anatomical structures and velocity field, as well as easy scan
prescription. However, its relatively long scan time holds back the clinical
applications of 4D flow MRI. Respiratory gating reduces the respiratory motion,
but may significantly prolong the overall scan time. In the present study, the
multi-site reproducibility, test–retest reliability, and inter-observer agreement
of non-respiratory gated 4D flow MRI in measuring blood flow and velocity of
thoracic great vessels were evaluated. Good test–retest reliability,
multicenter, and inter-observer agreements were obtained. The accuracy of
4D flow has been previously investigated and reported [5], confidence of its reproducibility without respiratory gating may further
enhance its clinical applications. Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
[1]
Vasanawala SS, Hanneman K, Alley MT, Hsiao A. Congenital heart disease
assessment with 4D flow MRI. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
2015;42(4):870-86.
[2]
Kanski M, Töger J, Steding-Ehrenborg K, Xanthis C, Bloch KM, Heiberg E,
et al. Wholeheart four-dimensional flow can be acquired with preserved quality
without respiratory gating, facilitating clinical use: a head-to-head
comparison. 2015;15(1):20.
[3]
Lai P, Shimakawa A, Cheng JY, Alley MT, Vasanawala S, Brau AC.
Sub-8-minute cardiac four dimensional flow MRI using kat ARC and variable
density signal averaging. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 2015;17
[4]
Chelu RG, Wanambiro KW, Hsiao A, Swart LE, Voogd T, van den Hoven AT, et
al. Cloudprocessed 4D CMR flow imaging for pulmonary flow quantification.
2016;85(10):1849-56.
[5]
Feneis JF, Kyubwa E, Atianzar K, Cheng JY, Alley MT, Vasanawala SS, et
al. 4D flow MRI quantification of mitral and tricuspid regurgitation:
Reproducibility and consistency relative to conventional MRI. Journal of
Magnetic Resonance Imaging 2018.