University of East Anglia, Norwich Medical School, Norfolk, United Kingdom; Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norfolk, United Kingdom.
Department of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular disease, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Int J Cardiol. 2022 Oct 1;364:148-156. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.06.032. Epub 2022 Jun 16.
We aim to validate four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) peak velocity tracking methods for measuring the peak velocity of mitral inflow against Doppler echocardiography.
Fifty patients were recruited who had 4D flow CMR and Doppler Echocardiography. After transvalvular flow segmentation using established valve tracking methods, peak velocity was automatically derived using three-dimensional streamlines of transvalvular flow. In addition, a static-planar method was used at the tip of mitral valve to mimic Doppler technique.
Peak E-wave mitral inflow velocity was comparable between TTE and the novel 4D flow automated dynamic method (0.9 ± 0.5 vs 0.94 ± 0.6 m/s; p = 0.29) however there was a statistically significant difference when compared with the static planar method (0.85 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.01). Median A-wave peak velocity was also comparable across TTE and the automated dynamic streamline (0.77 ± 0.4 vs 0.76 ± 0.4 m/s; p = 0.77). A significant difference was seen with the static planar method (0.68 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.04). E/A ratio was comparable between TTE and both the automated dynamic and static planar method (1.1 ± 0.7 vs 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.74 and 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.5 respectively). Both novel 4D flow methods showed good correlation with TTE for E-wave (dynamic method; r = 0.70; P < 0.001 and static-planar method; r = 0.67; P < 0.001) and A-wave velocity measurements (dynamic method; r = 0.83; P < 0.001 and static method; r = 0.71; P < 0.001). The automated dynamic method demonstrated excellent intra/inter-observer reproducibility for all parameters.
Automated dynamic peak velocity tracing method using 4D flow CMR is comparable to Doppler echocardiography for mitral inflow assessment and has excellent reproducibility for clinical use.
旨在验证四维血流心血管磁共振(4D flow CMR)峰值速度跟踪方法,以测量二尖瓣流入道的峰值速度与多普勒超声心动图相对比。
招募了 50 名患者,他们均接受了 4D flow CMR 和多普勒超声心动图检查。在使用既定的瓣膜跟踪方法对跨瓣血流进行分段后,使用跨瓣血流的三维流线自动得出峰值速度。此外,还在二尖瓣尖端使用静态平面方法模拟多普勒技术。
二尖瓣 E 波峰值流速在 TTE 和新型 4D flow 自动动态方法之间具有可比性(0.9 ± 0.5 与 0.94 ± 0.6 m/s;p = 0.29),但与静态平面方法相比存在统计学差异(0.85 ± 0.5 m/s;p = 0.01)。TTE 和自动动态流线之间的 A 波峰值流速中位数也具有可比性(0.77 ± 0.4 与 0.76 ± 0.4 m/s;p = 0.77)。与静态平面方法相比,差异具有统计学意义(0.68 ± 0.5 m/s;p = 0.04)。E/A 比值在 TTE 和自动动态及静态平面方法之间具有可比性(1.1 ± 0.7 与 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s;p = 0.74 和 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s;p = 0.5)。两种新型 4D flow 方法均与 TTE 对 E 波(动态方法;r = 0.70;P < 0.001 和静态平面方法;r = 0.67;P < 0.001)和 A 波速度测量(动态方法;r = 0.83;P < 0.001 和静态方法;r = 0.71;P < 0.001)具有良好的相关性。自动动态方法显示出优异的各参数内/间观察者可重复性。
使用 4D flow CMR 的自动动态峰值速度跟踪方法可与多普勒超声心动图相比用于二尖瓣流入道评估,并且具有出色的临床使用可重复性。