Retrospective Camera-Based Respiratory Gating in Clinical Whole-Heart 4D Flow MRI.

Autor: Gottwald LM; Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, The Netherlands., Blanken CPS; Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, The Netherlands., Tourais J; MR R&D-Clinical Science, Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands.; Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.; Magnetic Resonance Systems Lab, Department of Imaging Physics, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands., Smink J; MR R&D-Clinical Science, Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands., Planken RN; Cardiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Boekholdt SM; Cardiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Meijboom LJ; Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, The Netherlands., Coolen BF; Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Strijkers GJ; Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Nederveen AJ; Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, The Netherlands., van Ooij P; Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, The Netherlands.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI [J Magn Reson Imaging] 2021 Aug; Vol. 54 (2), pp. 440-451. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Mar 10.
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27564
Abstrakt: Background: Respiratory gating is generally recommended in 4D flow MRI of the heart to avoid blurring and motion artifacts. Recently, a novel automated contact-less camera-based respiratory motion sensor has been introduced.
Purpose: To compare camera-based respiratory gating (CAM) with liver-lung-navigator-based gating (NAV) and no gating (NO) for whole-heart 4D flow MRI.
Study Type: Retrospective.
Subjects: Thirty two patients with a spectrum of cardiovascular diseases.
Field Strength/sequence: A 3T, 3D-cine spoiled-gradient-echo-T1-weighted-sequence with flow-encoding in three spatial directions.
Assessment: Respiratory phases were derived and compared against each other by cross-correlation. Three radiologists/cardiologist scored images reconstructed with camera-based, navigator-based, and no respiratory gating with a 4-point Likert scale (qualitative analysis). Quantitative image quality analysis, in form of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and liver-lung-edge (LLE) for sharpness and quantitative flow analysis of the valves were performed semi-automatically.
Statistical Tests: One-way repeated measured analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Wilks's lambda testing and follow-up pairwise comparisons. Significance level of P ≤ 0.05. Krippendorff's-alpha-test for inter-rater reliability.
Results: The respiratory signal analysis revealed that CAM and NAV phases were highly correlated (C = 0.93 ± 0.09, P < 0.01). Image scoring showed poor inter-rater reliability and no significant differences were observed (P ≥ 0.16). The image quality comparison showed that NAV and CAM were superior to NO with higher SNR (P = 0.02) and smaller LLE (P < 0.01). The quantitative flow analysis showed significant differences between the three respiratory-gated reconstructions in the tricuspid and pulmonary valves (P ≤ 0.05), but not in the mitral and aortic valves (P > 0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed that reconstructions without respiratory gating were different in flow measurements to either CAM or NAV or both, but no differences were found between CAM and NAV reconstructions.
Data Conclusion: Camera-based respiratory gating performed as well as conventional liver-lung-navigator-based respiratory gating. Quantitative image quality analysis showed that both techniques were equivalent and superior to no-gating-reconstructions. Quantitative flow analysis revealed local flow differences (tricuspid/pulmonary valves) in images of no-gating-reconstructions, but no differences were found between images reconstructed with camera-based and navigator-based respiratory gating.
Level of Evidence: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
(© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: