Brandt Andreas Hjelm, Olesen Jacob Bjerring, Moshavegh Ramin, Jensen Jørgen Arendt, Nielsen Michael Bachmann, Hansen Kristoffer Lindskov
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bk Medical Aps, 2730 Herlev, Denmark.
Neurol Int. 2021 Jun 23;13(3):269-278. doi: 10.3390/neurolint13030028.
Volume flow estimation in the common carotid artery (CCA) can assess the absolute hemodynamic effect of a carotid stenosis. The aim of this study was to compare a commercial vector flow imaging (VFI) setup against the reference method magnetic resonance phase contrast angiography (MRA) for volume flow estimation in the CCA. Ten healthy volunteers were scanned with VFI and MRA over the CCA. VFI had an improved precision of 19.2% compared to MRA of 31.9% ( = 0.061). VFI estimated significantly lower volume flow than MRA (mean difference: 63.2 mL/min, 0.017), whilst the correlation between VFI and MRA was strong ( = 0.81, < 0.0001). A Bland-Altman plot indicated a systematic bias. After bias correction, the percentage error was reduced from 41.0% to 25.2%. This study indicated that a VFI setup for volume flow estimation is precise and strongly correlated to MRA volume flow estimation, and after correcting for the systematic bias, VFI and MRA become interchangeable.
颈总动脉（CCA）的容积流量估计可评估颈动脉狭窄的绝对血流动力学效应。本研究的目的是比较一种商用矢量流成像（VFI）设备与用于CCA容积流量估计的参考方法磁共振相位对比血管造影（MRA）。对10名健康志愿者的CCA进行了VFI和MRA扫描。与MRA的31.9%相比，VFI的精度提高了19.2%（P = 0.061）。VFI估计的容积流量显著低于MRA（平均差异：63.2 mL/min，P = 0.017），而VFI与MRA之间的相关性很强（r = 0.81，P < 0.0001）。Bland-Altman图显示存在系统偏差。偏差校正后，百分比误差从41.0%降至25.2%。本研究表明，用于容积流量估计的VFI设备精确且与MRA容积流量估计密切相关，校正系统偏差后，VFI和MRA可相互替代。
