Hansen K L, Udesen J, Oddershede N, Henze L, Thomsen C, Jensen J A, Nielsen M B
Department of Radiology, Section of Ultrasound, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Kbh Ø, Denmark.
Ultrasonics. 2009 Dec;49(8):659-67. doi: 10.1016/j.ultras.2009.04.002. Epub 2009 May 7.
The objective of this paper is to validate angle independent vector velocity methods for blood velocity estimation. Conventional Doppler ultrasound (US) only estimates the blood velocity along the US beam direction where the estimate is angle corrected assuming laminar flow parallel to vessel boundaries. This results in incorrect blood velocity estimates, when angle of insonation approaches 90 degrees or when blood flow is non-laminar. Three angle independent vector velocity methods are evaluated in this paper: directional beamforming (DB), synthetic aperture flow imaging (STA) and transverse oscillation (TO). The performances of the three methods were investigated by measuring the stroke volume in the right common carotid artery of 11 healthy volunteers with magnetic resonance phase contrast angiography (MRA) as reference. The correlation with confidence intervals (CI) between the three vector velocity methods and MRA were: DB vs. MRA: R=0.84 (p<0.01, 95% CI: 0.49-0.96); STA vs. MRA: R=0.71 (p<0.05, 95% CI: 0.19-0.92) and TO vs. MRA: R=0.91 (p<0.01, 95% CI: 0.69-0.98). No significant differences were observed for any of the three comparisons (DB vs. MRA: p=0.65; STA vs. MRA: p=0.24; TO vs. MRA: p=0.36). Bland-Altman plots were additionally constructed, and mean differences with limits of agreements (LoA) for the three comparisons were: DB vs. MRA=0.17 ml (95% CI: -0.61-0.95) with LoA=-2.11-2.44 ml; STA vs. MRA=-0.55 ml (95% CI: -1.54-0.43) with LoA=-3.42-2.32 ml; TO vs. MRA=0.24 ml (95% CI: -0.32-0.81) with LoA=-1.41-1.90 ml. According to the results, reliable volume flow estimates can be obtained with all three methods. The three US vector velocity techniques can yield quantitative insight into flow dynamics and visualize complex flow patterns, which potentially can give the clinician a novel tool for cardiovascular disease assessment.
本文的目的是验证用于估计血流速度的角度无关向量速度方法。传统的多普勒超声(US)仅估计沿超声束方向的血流速度,该估计在假设层流平行于血管边界的情况下进行角度校正。当超声入射角接近90度或血流为非层流时,这会导致血流速度估计错误。本文评估了三种角度无关向量速度方法:定向波束形成(DB)、合成孔径血流成像(STA)和横向振荡(TO)。通过以磁共振相位对比血管造影(MRA)为参考,测量11名健康志愿者右颈总动脉的每搏输出量,研究了这三种方法的性能。三种向量速度方法与MRA之间的相关性及置信区间(CI)为:DB与MRA:R = 0.84(p < 0.01,95% CI:0.49 - 0.96);STA与MRA:R = 0.71(p < 0.05,95% CI:0.19 - 0.92);TO与MRA:R = 0.91(p < 0.01,95% CI:0.69 - 0.98)。这三种比较中的任何一种均未观察到显著差异(DB与MRA:p = 0.65;STA与MRA:p = 0.24;TO与MRA:p = 0.36)。此外还构建了布兰德 - 奥特曼图,三种比较的平均差异及一致性界限(LoA)为:DB与MRA = 0.17 ml(95% CI: - 0.61 - 0.95),LoA = - 2.11 - 2.44 ml;STA与MRA = - 0.55 ml(95% CI: - 1.54 - 0.43),LoA = - 3.42 - 2.32 ml;TO与MRA = 0.24 ml(95% CI: - 0.32 - 0.81),LoA = - 1.41 - 1.90 ml。根据结果,所有这三种方法都可以获得可靠的体积流量估计值。这三种超声向量速度技术可以对血流动力学进行定量分析,并可视化复杂的血流模式,这有可能为临床医生提供一种用于心血管疾病评估的新型工具。