Abstract
Purpose
We compared the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements of pulsatile flow velocity in a small tube phantom using different spatial factors versus those obtained by intraluminal Doppler guidewire examination (as reference).
Materials and methods
We generated pulsatile flow velocities averaging about 20–290 cm/sec in a tube of 4 mm diameter; we performed phase-contrast cine MRI on pixels measuring 1.002–2.502 mm2. We quantified spatial peak flow velocities of a single pixel and a cluster of five pixels and spatial mean velocities within regions of interest enclosing the entire lumen in the phantom’s cross-section. Finally, we compared the measurements of temporally mean and maximum flow velocity with the Doppler measurements.
Results
Linear correlation was excellent between both measurements of spatial peak flow velocities in one pixel. The highest spatial resolution using spatial peak flow velocities of a single pixel allowed the most accurate MRI measurements of both temporally mean and maximum pulsatile flow velocity (r = 0.97 and 0.99, respectively: MRI measurement = 0.95x + 8.9 and 0.88x + 24.0 cm/s, respectively). Otherwise, MRI measurements were significantly underestimated at lower spatial resolutions.
Conclusion
High spatial resolution allowed accurate MRI measurement of temporally mean and maximum pulsatile flow velocity at spatial peak velocities of one pixel.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K, Van Der Voort PH, Bonnier HJ, Bartunek J, et al. Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1703–1708.
Tamita K, Akasaka T, Takagi T, Yamamuro A, Yamabe K, Katayama M, et al. Effects of microvascular dysfunction on myocardial fractional flow reserve after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;57:452–459.
Gould KL, Lipscomb K, Hamilton GW. Physiologic basis for assessing critical coronary stenosis: instantaneous flow response and regional distribution during coronary hyperemia as measures of coronary flow reserve. Am J Cardiol 1974;33:87–94.
Cole JS, Hartley CJ. The pulsed Doppler coronary artery catheter: preliminary report of a new technique for measuring rapid changes in coronary artery blood flow velocity in man. Circulation 1977;56:18–25.
Wilson RF, Laughlin DE, Ackell PH, Chilian WM, Holida MD, Hartley CJ, et al. Transluminal, subselective measurement of coronary artery blood flow velocity and vasodilator reserve in man. Circulation 1985;72:82–92.
Doucette JW, Corl PD, Payne HM, Flynn AE, Goto M, Nassi M, et al. Validation of a Doppler guide wire for intravascular measurement of coronary artery flow velocity. Circulation 1992;85:1899–1911.
Jenni R, Büchi M, Zweifel HJ, Ritter M. Impact of Doppler guidewire size and flow rates on intravascular velocity profiles. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1998;45:96–100.
Ofili EO, Kern MJ, Labovitz AJ, St. Vrain JA, Segal J, Aquirre FV, et al. Analysis of coronary blood flow velocity dynamics in angiographically normal and stenosed arteries before and after endolumen enlargement by angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;21:308–316.
Segal J, Kern MJ, Scott NA, King SB 3rd, Doucette JW, Heuser RR, et al. Alterations of phasic coronary artery flow velocity in humans during percutaneous coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;20:276–286.
Wilson RF, Johnson MR, Marcus ML, Aylward PE, Skorton DJ, Collins S, et al. The effect of coronary angioplasty on coronary flow reserve. Circulation 1988;77:873–885.
Wilson RF, White CW. Does coronary artery bypass surgery restore normal maximal coronary flow reserve? The effect of diffuse atherosclerosis and focal obstructive lesions. Circulation 1987;76:563–571.
Fearon WF, Nakamura M, Lee DP, Rezaee M, Vagelos RH, Hunt SA, et al. Simultaneous assessment of fractional and coronary flow reserves in cardiac transplant recipients: Physiologic Investigation for Transplant Arteriopathy (PITA study). Circulation 2003;108:1605–1610.
Scwartzkopff B, Motz W, Frenzel H, Vogt M, Knauer S, Strauer BE. Structural and functional alterations of the intramyocardial coronary arterioles in patients with arterial hypertension. Circulation 1993;88:993–1003.
Neglia D, Parodi O, Gallopin M, Sambuceti G, Giorgetti A, Pratali L, et al. Myocardial blood flow response to pacing tachycardia and to dipyridamole infusion in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy without overt heart failure: a quantitative assessment by positron emission tomography. Circulation 1995;92:796–804.
Edelman RR, Manning WJ, Gervino E, Li W. Flow velocity quantification in human coronary arteries with fast, breath-hold MR angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 1993;3:699–703.
Keegan J, Firmin D, Gatehouse P, Longmore D. The application of breath-hold phase velocity mapping techniques to the measurement of coronary artery blood flow velocity: phantom data and initial in vivo results. Magn Reson Med 1994;31:526–536.
Chatzimavroudis GP, Zhang H, Halliburton SS, Moore JR, Simonetti OP, Schvartzman PR, et al. Clinical blood flow quantification with segmented k-space magnetic resonance phase velocity mapping. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003;17:65–71.
Shibata M, Sakuma H, Isaka N, Takeda K, Higgins CB, Nakano T. Assessment of coronary flow reserve with fast cine phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with measurement by Doppler guide wire. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:563–568.
Sakuma H, Blake LM, Amidon TM, O’sullivan M, Szolar DH, Furber AP, et al. Coronary flow reserve: noninvasive measurement in humans with breath-hold velocity-encoded cine MR imaging. Radiology 1996;198:745–750.
Wolf RL, Ehman RL, Riederer SJ, Rossman PJ. Analysis of systematic and random error in MR volumetric flow measurements. Magn Reson Med 1993;30:82–91.
Nagel E, Thouet T, Klein C, Schalla S, Bornstedt A, Schnakkenburg B, et al. Noninvasive determination of coronary blood flow velocity with cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients after stent deployment. Circulation 2003;107:1738–1743.
Tang C, Blatter DD, Parker DL. Accuracy of phase-contrast flow measurements in the presence of partial-volume effects. J Magn Reson Imaging 1993;3:377–385.
Machida H, Komori Y, Ueno E, Shen Y, Hirata M, Kojima S, et al. Spatial factors for quantifying constant flow velocity in a small tube phantom: comparison of phase-contrast cine MR imaging and intraluminal Doppler guidewire. Jpn J Radiol 2009;27:335–341.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–310.
Nagel E, Bornstedt A, Hug J, Schnackenburg B, Wellnhofer E, Fleck E. Noninvasive determination of coronary blood flow velocity with magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of breath-hold and navigator techniques with intravascular ultrasound. Magn Reson Med 1999;41:544–549.
Matre K, Ersland L, Larsen TH, Andersen E. In vitro agreement between magnetic resonance imaging and intraluminal Doppler ultrasound for high flow velocity measurements. Scand Cardiovasc J 2002;36:180–186.
Hundley WG, Lange RA, Clarke GD, Meshack BM, Payne J, Landau C, et al. Assessment of coronary arterial flow and flow reserve in humans with magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation 1996;93:1502–1508.
Bedaux WL, Hofman MB, de Cock CC, Stoel MG, Visser CA, van Rossum AC. Magnetic resonance imaging versus Doppler guide wire in the assessment of coronary flow reserve in patients with coronary artery disease. Coron Artery Dis 2002;13:365–372.
Arheden H, Saeed M, Törnqvist E, Lund G, Wendland MF, Higgins CB, et al. Accuracy of segmented MR velocity mapping to measure small vessel pulsatile flow in a phantom simulating cardiac motion. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13:722–728.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Machida, H., Komori, Y., Ueno, E. et al. Accurate measurement of pulsatile flow velocity in a small tube phantom: comparison of phase-contrast cine magnetic resonance imaging and intraluminal Doppler guidewire. Jpn J Radiol 28, 571–577 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-010-0472-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-010-0472-7