AimsCardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) allows non-invasive phase contrast measurements of flow through planes transecting large vessels. However, some clinically valuable applications are highly sensitive to errors caused by small offsets of measured velocities if these are not adequately corrected, for example by the use of static tissue or static phantom correction of the offset error. We studied the severity of uncorrected velocity offset errors across sites and CMR systems.Methods and ResultsIn a multi-centre, multi-vendor study, breath-hold through-plane retrospectively ECG-gated phase contrast acquisitions, as are used clinically for aortic and pulmonary flow measurement, were applied to static gelatin phantoms in twelve 1.5 T CMR systems, using a velocity encoding range of 150 cm/s. No post-processing corrections of offsets were implemented. The greatest uncorrected velocity offset, taken as an average over a 'great vessel' region (30 mm diameter) located up to 70 mm in-plane distance from the magnet isocenter, ranged from 0.4 cm/s to 4.9 cm/s. It averaged 2.7 cm/s over all the planes and systems. By theoretical calculation, a velocity offset error of 0.6 cm/s (representing just 0.4% of a 150 cm/s velocity encoding range) is barely acceptable, potentially causing about 5% miscalculation of cardiac output and up to 10% error in shunt measurement.ConclusionIn the absence of hardware or software upgrades able to reduce phase offset errors, all the systems tested appeared to require post-acquisition correction to achieve consistently reliable breath-hold measurements of flow. The effectiveness of offset correction software will still need testing with respect to clinical flow acquisitions.

IntroductionPhase contrast MRI allows for the examination of complex hemodynamics in the heart and adjacent great vessels. Vortex flow patterns seem to play an important role in certain vascular pathologies. We propose two- and three-dimensional metrics for the objective quantification of aortic vortex blood flow in 4D phase contrast MRI.Materials and MethodsFor two-dimensional vorticity assessment, a standardized set of 6 regions-of-interest (ROIs) was defined throughout the course of the aorta. For each ROI, a heatmap of time-resolved vorticity values was computed. Evolution of minimum, maximum, and average values as well as opposing rotational flow components were analyzed. For three-dimensional analysis, vortex core detection was implemented combining the predictor-corrector method with λ2 correction. Strength, elongation, and radial expansion of the detected vortex core were recorded over time. All methods were applied to 4D flow MRI datasets of 9 healthy subjects, 2 patients with mildly dilated aorta, and 1 patient with aortic aneurysm.ResultsVorticity quantification in the 6 standardized ROIs enabled the description of physiological vortex flow in the healthy aorta. Helical flow developed early in the ascending aorta (absolute vorticity = 166.4±86.4 s-1 at 12% of cardiac cycle) followed by maximum values in mid-systole in the aortic arch (240.1±45.2 s-1 at 16%). Strength, elongation, and radial expansion of 3D vortex cores escalated in early systole, reaching a peak in mid systole (strength = 241.2±30.7 s-1 at 17%, elongation = 65.1±34.6 mm at 18%, expansion = 80.1±48.8 mm2 at 20%), before all three parameters similarly decreased to overall low values in diastole. Flow patterns were considerably altered in patient data: Vortex flow developed late in mid/end-systole close to the aortic bulb and no physiological helix was found in the aortic arch.ConclusionsWe have introduced objective measures for quantification of vortical flow in 4D phase contrast MRI. Vortex blood flow in the thoracic aorta could be consistently described in all healthy volunteers. In patient data, pathologically altered vortex flow was observed.

This study indicates the ability of texture analysis and machine learning in detecting MI on noncontrast low radiation dose CCT images being not visible for the radiologists' eye.

At matched CT scan protocol settings and identical image reconstruction parameters, the PCD yields superior in-stent lumen delineation of coronary artery stents as compared with conventional EID arrays.