Inter-site comparability of 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance measurements in healthy traveling volunteers-a multi-site and multi-magnetic field strength study.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-08 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fcvm.2024.1456814
Maximilian Müller, Elias Daud, Georg Langer, Jan Gröschel, Darian Viezzer, Thomas Hadler, Ning Jin, Daniel Giese, Sebastian Schmitter, Jeanette Schulz-Menger, Ralf F Trauzeddel
{"title":"Inter-site comparability of 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance measurements in healthy traveling volunteers-a multi-site and multi-magnetic field strength study.","authors":"Maximilian Müller, Elias Daud, Georg Langer, Jan Gröschel, Darian Viezzer, Thomas Hadler, Ning Jin, Daniel Giese, Sebastian Schmitter, Jeanette Schulz-Menger, Ralf F Trauzeddel","doi":"10.3389/fcvm.2024.1456814","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Time-resolved 3D cine phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) enables the characterization of blood flow using basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters. However, different confounders, e.g., different field strength, scanner configurations, or sequences, might impact 4D flow CMR measurements. This study aimed to analyze the inter-site reproducibility of 4D flow CMR to determine the influence of said confounders.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cohort of 19 healthy traveling volunteers underwent 4D flow CMR at four different sites (Sites I-III: 3 T scanner; Site IV: 1.5 T scanner; all Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany). Two protocols of one 4D flow CMR research sequence were performed, one acquiring velocity vector fields in the thoracic aorta only and one in the entire heart and thoracic aorta combined. Basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters, i.e., forward flow volume (FFV), peak and mean velocities (Vp and Vm), and wall shear stress (3D WSS), at nine different planes across the thoracic aorta (P1-P2 ascending aorta, P3-P5 aortic arch, P6-P9 descending aorta) were analyzed. Based on a second scan at Site I, mean values and tolerance ranges (TOL) were generated for inter-site comparison. Equivalency was assumed when confidence intervals of Sites II-IV lay within such TOL. Additionally, inter- and intra-observer analysis as well as a comparison between the two protocols was performed, using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Inter-site comparability showed equivalency in P1 and P2 for FFV, Vp, and Vm at all sites. Non-equivalency was present in various planes of P3-P9 and in P2 for 3D WSS in one protocol. In total, Site IV showed the most disagreements. Protocol comparison yielded excellent (>0.9) ICC in every plane for FFV, good (0.75-0.9) to excellent ICC for Vm and 3D WSS, good to excellent ICC in eight planes for Vp, and moderate (0.5-0.75) ICC in one plane for Vp. Inter- and intra-observer analysis showed excellent agreement for every parameter.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters revealed equivalency at different sites and field strength in the ascending aorta, a clinically important region of interest, under a highly controlled environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":12414,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","volume":"11 ","pages":"1456814"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11582008/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1456814","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Time-resolved 3D cine phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) enables the characterization of blood flow using basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters. However, different confounders, e.g., different field strength, scanner configurations, or sequences, might impact 4D flow CMR measurements. This study aimed to analyze the inter-site reproducibility of 4D flow CMR to determine the influence of said confounders.

Methods: A cohort of 19 healthy traveling volunteers underwent 4D flow CMR at four different sites (Sites I-III: 3 T scanner; Site IV: 1.5 T scanner; all Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany). Two protocols of one 4D flow CMR research sequence were performed, one acquiring velocity vector fields in the thoracic aorta only and one in the entire heart and thoracic aorta combined. Basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters, i.e., forward flow volume (FFV), peak and mean velocities (Vp and Vm), and wall shear stress (3D WSS), at nine different planes across the thoracic aorta (P1-P2 ascending aorta, P3-P5 aortic arch, P6-P9 descending aorta) were analyzed. Based on a second scan at Site I, mean values and tolerance ranges (TOL) were generated for inter-site comparison. Equivalency was assumed when confidence intervals of Sites II-IV lay within such TOL. Additionally, inter- and intra-observer analysis as well as a comparison between the two protocols was performed, using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results: Inter-site comparability showed equivalency in P1 and P2 for FFV, Vp, and Vm at all sites. Non-equivalency was present in various planes of P3-P9 and in P2 for 3D WSS in one protocol. In total, Site IV showed the most disagreements. Protocol comparison yielded excellent (>0.9) ICC in every plane for FFV, good (0.75-0.9) to excellent ICC for Vm and 3D WSS, good to excellent ICC in eight planes for Vp, and moderate (0.5-0.75) ICC in one plane for Vp. Inter- and intra-observer analysis showed excellent agreement for every parameter.

Conclusions: Basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters revealed equivalency at different sites and field strength in the ascending aorta, a clinically important region of interest, under a highly controlled environment.

健康旅行志愿者四维血流心血管磁共振测量的站点间可比性--多站点和多磁场强度研究。
背景:时间分辨三维电影相位对比心血管磁共振(4D血流CMR)可利用基本和高级血液动力学参数描述血流特征。然而,不同的混杂因素,如不同的场强、扫描仪配置或序列,可能会影响 4D 血流 CMR 测量。本研究旨在分析 4D 血流 CMR 的站间重现性,以确定上述混杂因素的影响:19名健康的旅行志愿者在四个不同的部位(部位I-III:3 T扫描仪;部位IV:1.5 T扫描仪;均位于德国埃尔兰根的西门子医疗集团)接受了4D血流CMR检查。一个四维血流 CMR 研究序列有两个方案,一个方案只采集胸主动脉的速度矢量场,另一个方案采集整个心脏和胸主动脉的速度矢量场。分析了胸主动脉九个不同平面(P1-P2 升主动脉、P3-P5 主动脉弓、P6-P9 降主动脉)的基本和高级血液动力学参数,即前向流体积(FFV)、峰值和平均速度(Vp 和 Vm)以及壁剪应力(3D WSS)。根据站点 I 的第二次扫描,生成平均值和容差范围 (TOL),用于站点间比较。如果第二至第四扫描点的置信区间在该 TOL 范围内,则假定其具有等效性。此外,还使用类内相关系数(ICC)对观察者之间和观察者内部进行了分析,并对两种方案进行了比较:结果:结果表明,P1 和 P2 在所有部位的 FFV、Vp 和 Vm 均具有等效性。在一个方案中,P3-P9 的不同平面和 P2 的 3D WSS 存在非等效性。总的来说,IV 位点的差异最大。方案比较结果显示,FFV 在每个平面的 ICC 均为优秀(>0.9),Vm 和 3D WSS 的 ICC 为良好(0.75-0.9)至优秀,Vp 在八个平面的 ICC 为良好至优秀,Vp 在一个平面的 ICC 为中等(0.5-0.75)。观察者之间和观察者内部的分析表明,每个参数的一致性都非常好:基本和高级血液动力学参数显示,在高度受控的环境下,升主动脉这一临床上重要的相关区域的不同部位和场强具有等效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
3529
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers? Which frontiers? Where exactly are the frontiers of cardiovascular medicine? And who should be defining these frontiers? At Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine we believe it is worth being curious to foresee and explore beyond the current frontiers. In other words, we would like, through the articles published by our community journal Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, to anticipate the future of cardiovascular medicine, and thus better prevent cardiovascular disorders and improve therapeutic options and outcomes of our patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信