Hemodynamic evaluation in patients with transposition of the great arteries after the arterial switch operation: 4D flow and 2D phase contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance compared with Doppler echocardiography

Comparison of Four-Dimensional Flow MRI, Two-Dimensional Phase-Contrast MRI and Echocardiography in Transposition of the Great Arteries

Pulmonary artery (PA) stenosis is a common complication after the arterial switch operation (ASO) for transposition of the great arteries (TGA). Four-dimensional flow (4D flow) CMR provides the ability to quantify flow within an entire volume instead of a single plane. The aim of this study was to compare PA maximum velocities and stroke volumes between 4D flow CMR, two-dimensional phase-contrast (2D PCMR) and echocardiography. A prospective study including TGA patients after ASO was performed between December 2018 and October 2020. All patients underwent echocardiography and CMR, including 2D PCMR and 4D flow CMR. Maximum velocities and stroke volumes were measured in the main, right, and left PA (MPA, LPA, and RPA, respectively). A total of 39 patients aged 20 ± 8 years were included. Maximum velocities in the MPA, LPA, and RPA measured by 4D flow CMR were significantly higher compared to 2D PCMR (p < 0.001 for all). PA assessment by echocardiography was not possible in the majority of patients. 4D flow CMR maximum velocity measurements were consistently higher than those by 2D PCMR with a mean difference of 65 cm/s for the MPA, and 77 cm/s for both the RPA and LPA. Stroke volumes showed good agreement between 4D flow CMR and 2D PCMR. Maximum velocities in the PAs after ASO for TGA are consistently lower by 2D PCMR, while echocardiography only allows for PA assessment in a minority of cases. Stroke volumes showed good agreement between 4D flow CMR and 2D PCMR.

Feasibility of Wave Intensity Analysis from 4D Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data

Congenital heart defects (CHD) introduce haemodynamic changes; e.g., bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) presents a turbulent helical flow, which activates aortic pathological processes. Flow quantification is crucial for diagnostics and to plan corrective strategies. Multiple imaging modalities exist, with phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging (PC-MRI) being the current gold standard; however, multiple predetermined site measurements may be required, while 4D MRI allows for measurements of area (A) and velocity (U) in all spatial dimensions, acquiring a single volume and enabling a retrospective analysis at multiple locations. We assessed the feasibility of gathering hemodynamic insight into aortic hemodynamics by means of wave intensity analysis (WIA) derived from 4D MRI. Data were collected in n = 12 BAV patients and n = 7 healthy controls. Following data acquisition, WIA was successfully derived at three planes (ascending, thoracic and descending aorta) in all cases. The values of wave speed were physiological and, while the small sample limited any clinical interpretation of the results, the study shows the possibility of studying wave travel and wave reflection based on 4D MRI. Below, we demonstrate for the first time the feasibility of deriving wave intensity analysis from 4D flow data and open the door to research applications in different cardiovascular scenarios.

Four-Dimensional Flow Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Assessment of Blood Flow in the Heart and Great Vessels: A Systematic Review

Four-dimensional (4D) flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows multidirectional quantification of blood flow in the heart and great vessels. Comparability of the technique to the current reference standards of flow assessment-two-dimensional (2D) flow MRI and Doppler echocardiography-varies in the literature. Image acquisition parameters likely impact upon the accuracy and reproducibility of 4D flow MRI. We therefore sought to review the current literature on 4D flow MRI in the heart and great vessels, in comparison to 2D flow MRI, Doppler echocardiography, and invasive catheterization. Using a predefined search strategy and inclusion and exclusion criteria, the databases EMBASE and Medline were searched in January 2021 for peer-reviewed research articles comparing cardiac 4D flow MRI to 2D flow MRI, Doppler echocardiography and/or invasive catheterization. The data from all relevant articles were assimilated and analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and chi χ² test. Forty-four manuscripts met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The review showed agreement of 4D flow MRI to the reference standard methods of flow assessment, particular in the measurement of peak velocity and stroke volume in 55% of manuscripts. The use of valve tracking significantly improves agreement between 4D flow MRI and the reference modalities (79% matching with the use of valve tracking vs. 50% without, P = 0.04). This review highlights that the impact of acquisition parameters on 4D flow MRI accuracy is multifactorial. It is therefore important that each center conducts its own quality assurance prior to using 4D flow MRI for clinical decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Quantification of peak blood flow velocity at the cardiac valve and great thoracic vessels by four-dimensional flow and two-dimensional phase-contrast MRI compared with echocardiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To objectively examine the agreement and correlation between four-dimensional (4D) flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and traditional two-dimensional (2D) phase-contrast (PC) MRI with the reference standard of Doppler echocardiography for measuring peak blood velocity at the cardiac valve and great arteries, and to assess if 4D flow MRI offers an advantage over the traditional 2D method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The literature was searched systematically for studies that evaluate the degree of correlation and agreement between 4D flow MRI or 2D PC MRI and Doppler retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the peak velocity pooled bias with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) and correlation coefficient (r) for 4D flow MRI and 2D PC MRI compared with Doppler.

RESULTS

Ten studies that compared 4D flow MRI with Doppler and 12 studies that compared 2D PC MRI with Doppler were included. 4D flow MRI showed an underestimation with bias and 95% LoA of -0.09 (-0.41, 0.24) m/s (p=0.079) while 2D PC MRI showed a poorer agreement with a bias and 95% LoA of -0.25 (-0.53, 0.03), p=0.596. 4D flow MRI and 2D PC MRI showed a strong correlation with R=0.80 (95% CI 0.75, 0.84; p<0.001) and R=0.83 (95% CI 0.79, 0.87; p<0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis, 4D flow MRI provides improved assessment of peak velocity when compared with traditional 2D PC MRI. 4D flow MRI can be considered an important complement or substitute to Doppler echocardiography for peak velocity assessment.

Structural Heart 4D Flow MRI for Hemodynamic Assessment: How We Do It

MRI is an essential diagnostic tool in the anatomic and functional evaluation of cardiovascular disease. In many practices, 2D phase-contrast (2D-PC) has been used for blood flow quantification. 4D Flow MRI is a time-resolved volumetric acquisition that captures the vector field of blood flow along with anatomic images. 4D Flow MRI provides a simpler acquisition compared to 2D-PC and facilitates a more accurate and comprehensive hemodynamic assessment. Advancements in accelerated imaging have significantly shortened scan times of 4D Flow MRI while preserving image quality, enabling this technology to transition from the research arena to routine clinical practice. In this article, we review technical optimization based on our clinical experience of over 10 years with 4D Flow MRI. We also present pearls and pitfalls in the practical application of 4D Flow MRI, including how to quantify cardiovascular shunts, valvular or vascular stenosis, and valvular regurgitation. As experience increases, and as 4D Flow sequences and post-processing software become more broadly available, 4D Flow MRI will likely become an essential component of cardiac imaging for practices involved in the management of congenital and acquired structural heart disease.

Additional value and new insights by four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging in congenital heart disease: application in neonates and young children

Cardiovascular MRI has become an essential imaging modality in children with congenital heart disease (CHD) in the last 15-20 years. With use of appropriate sequences, it provides important information on cardiovascular anatomy, blood flow and function for initial diagnosis and post-surgical or -interventional monitoring in children. Although considered as more sophisticated and challenging than CT, in particular in neonates and infants, MRI is able to provide information on intra- and extracardiac haemodynamics, in contrast to CT. In recent years, four-dimensional (4-D) flow MRI has emerged as an additional MR technique for retrospective assessment and visualisation of blood flow within the heart and any vessel of interest within the acquired three-dimensional (3-D) volume. Its application in young children requires special adaptations for the smaller vessel size and faster heart rate compared to adolescents or adults. In this article, we provide an overview of 4-D flow MRI in various types of complex CHD in neonates and infants to demonstrate its potential indications and beneficial application for optimised individual cardiovascular assessment. We focus on its application in clinical routine cardiovascular workup and, in addition, show some examples with pathologies other than CHD to highlight that 4-D flow MRI yields new insights in disease understanding and therapy planning. We shortly review the essentials of 4-D flow data acquisition, pre- and post-processing techniques in neonates, infants and young children. Finally, we conclude with some details on accuracy, limitations and pitfalls of the technique.

4D flow MRI applications in congenital heart disease

Advances in the diagnosis and management of congenital heart disease (CHD) have resulted in a growing population of patients surviving well into adulthood and requiring lifelong follow-up. Flow quantification is a central component in the assessment of patients with CHD. 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a tool that enables comprehensive study of flow. It involves the acquisition of a three-dimensional time-resolved volume with velocity encoding in all three spatial directions along the cardiac cycle. This allows flow quantification and visualization of blood flow patterns as well as the study of advanced hemodynamic parameters as kinetic energy and wall shear stress. 4D flow MRI-based study of flow has given insight into the altered hemodynamics in CHD particularly in bicuspid aortic valve disease and Fontan circulation. The aim of this review is to discuss the expanding clinical and research applications of 4D flow MRI in CHD as well its limitations.Key Points• Three-dimensional velocity encoding allows not only flow quantification but also the visualization of multidirectional flow patterns and the study of advanced hemodynamic parameters.• 4D flow MRI has added insight into the abnormal hemodynamics involved in congenital heart disease in particular in bicuspid aortic valve and Fontan circulation.• The main limitation of 4D flow MRI in congenital heart disease is the relatively long scan duration required for the complete coverage of the heart and great vessels with adequate spatiotemporal resolution.

4D Flow with MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become an important tool for the clinical evaluation of patients with cardiac and vascular diseases. Since its introduction in the late 1980s, quantitative flow imaging with MRI has become a routine part of standard-of-care cardiothoracic and vascular MRI for the assessment of pathological changes in blood flow in patients with cardiovascular disease. More recently, time-resolved flow imaging with velocity encoding along all three flow directions and three-dimensional (3D) anatomic coverage (4D flow MRI) has been developed and applied to enable comprehensive 3D visualization and quantification of hemodynamics throughout the human circulatory system. This article provides an overview of the use of 4D flow applications in different cardiac and vascular regions in the human circulatory system, with a focus on using 4D flow MRI in cardiothoracic and cerebrovascular diseases.

Neopulmonary Outflow Tract Obstruction Assessment by 4D Flow MRI in Adults With Transposition of the Great Arteries After Arterial Switch Operation

BACKGROUND

The main complication in adult patients with transposition of the great arteries (TGA) treated by an arterial switch operation (ASO) is neopulmonary outflow tract stenosis (NPOTS). However, pulmonary flow velocity measurements cannot always be performed with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) due to complex anatomical features. 4D flow MRI allows detection, quantification, and location of the obstruction site along the NPOTS.

PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS

To investigate the accuracy of 4D flow for the diagnosis of NPOTS in adults with TGA corrected by ASO.

STUDY TYPE

Prospective.

POPULATION

Thirty-three adult patients with TGA treated by ASO (19 men, mean age 25.5 years old).

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

Accelerated 4D flow research sequence at 3T.

ASSESSMENT

Maximum NPOTS velocities on TTE and 4D flow MRI done the same day.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Pearson correlation coefficient, paired t-test, and Bland-Altman analysis were used to investigate the relationship between TTE and MRI data.

RESULTS

In 16 patients (48.5%), evaluation of NPOTS anatomy was not obtained by TTE, while it was always possible by 4D flow. Peak flow velocity (PV) measurements in Doppler and 4D flow were highly correlated (r = 0.78; P < 0.001). PV >350 cm.s^-1 was detected in only one patient (3%) by TTE vs. five patients (15%) by 4D flow. Moreover, a high correlation was found between PV and the right ventricle (RV) mass index to body surface area when using 4D flow (r = 0.63; P < 0.001). The location of NPOTS was determined in all patients using 4D flow and concerned the main pulmonary artery in 42%.

DATA CONCLUSION

Compared to TTE, 4D flow MRI provides better sensitivity to detect and locate NPOTS in patients with TGA treated by ASO. 4D flow PV measurements in NPOTS were well correlated with TTE PV and RV mass.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1699-1705.

Comparison of 4D Flow MRI to 2D Flow MRI in the pulmonary arteries in healthy volunteers and patients with pulmonary hypertension

Purpose

4D and 2D phase-contrast MRI (2D Flow MRI, 4D Flow MRI, respectively) are increasingly being used to noninvasively assess pulmonary hypertension (PH). The goals of this study were i) to evaluate whether established quantitative parameters in 2D Flow MRI associated with pulmonary hypertension can be assessed using 4D Flow MRI; ii) to compare results from 4D Flow MRI on a digital broadband 3T MR system with data from clinically established MRI-techniques as well as conservation of mass analysis and phantom correction and iii) to elaborate on the added value of secondary flow patterns in detecting PH.

Methods

11 patients with PH (4f, 63 ± 16y), 15 age-matched healthy volunteers (9f, 56 ± 11y), and 20 young healthy volunteers (13f, 23 ± 2y) were scanned on a 3T MR scanner (Philips Ingenia). Subjects were examined with a 4D Flow, a 2D Flow and a bSSFP sequence. For extrinsic comparison, quantitative parameters measured with 4D Flow MRI were compared to i) a static phantom, ii) 2D Flow acquisitions and iii) stroke volume derived from a bSSFP sequence. For intrinsic comparison conservation of mass-analysis was employed. Dedicated software was used to extract various flow, velocity, and anatomical parameters. Visualization of blood flow was performed to detect secondary flow patterns.

Results

Overall, there was good agreement between all techniques, 4D Flow results revealed a considerable spread. Data improved after phantom correction. Both 4D and 2D Flow MRI revealed concordant results to differentiate patients from healthy individuals, especially based on values derived from anatomical parameters. The visualization of a vortex, indicating the presence of PH was achieved in 9 /11 patients and 2/35 volunteers.

Discussion

This study confirms that quantitative parameters used for characterizing pulmonary hypertension can be gathered using 4D Flow MRI within clinically reasonable limits of agreement. Despite its unfavorable spatial and lesser temporal resolution and a non-neglible spread of results, the identification of diseased study participants was possible.

Validation of aortic valve 4D flow analysis and myocardial deformation by cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients after the arterial switch operation

BACKGROUND

Aortic regurgitation (AR) and subclinical left ventricular (LV) dysfunction expressed by myocardial deformation imaging are common in patients with transposition of the great arteries after the arterial switch operation (ASO). Echocardiographic evaluation is often hampered by reduced acoustic window settings. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging provides a robust alternative as it allows for comprehensive assessment of degree of AR and LV function. The purpose of this study is to validate CMR based 4-dimensional flow quantification (4D flow) for degree of AR and feature tracking strain measurements for LV deformation assessment in ASO patients.

METHODS

A total of 81 ASO patients (median 20.6 years, IQR 13.5-28.4) underwent CMR for 4D and 2D flow analysis. CMR global longitudinal strain (GLS) feature tracking was compared to echocardiographic (echo) speckle tracking. Agreements between and within tests were expressed as intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC).

RESULTS

Eleven ASO patients (13.6%) showed AR > 5% by 4D flow, with good correlation to 2D flow assessment (ICC = 0.85). 4D flow stroke volume of the aortic valve demonstrated good agreement to 2D stroke volume over the mitral valve (internal validation, ICC = 0.85) and multi-slice planimetric LV stroke volume (external validation, ICC = 0.95). 2D flow stroke volume showed slightly less, though still good agreement with 4D flow (ICC = 0.78) and planimetric LV stroke volume (ICC = 0.87). GLS by CMR was normal (- 18.8 ± 4.4%) and demonstrated good agreement with GLS and segmental analysis by echocardiographic speckle tracking (GLS = - 17.3 ± 3.1%, ICC of 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic 4D flow and CMR feature tracking GLS analysis demonstrate good to excellent agreement with 2D flow assessment and echocardiographic speckle tracking, respectively, and can therefore reliably be used for an integrated and comprehensive CMR analysis of aortic valve competence and LV deformation analysis in ASO patients.

Validation and reproducibility of cardiovascular 4D-flow MRI from two vendors using 2 × 2 parallel imaging acceleration in pulsatile flow phantom and in vivo with and without respiratory gating

Background

4D-flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used.

Purpose

To validate 4D-flow sequences in phantom and in vivo, comparing volume flow and kinetic energy (KE) head-to-head, with and without respiratory gating.

Material and Methods

Achieva dStream (Philips Healthcare) and MAGNETOM Aera (Siemens Healthcare) 1.5-T scanners were used. Phantom validation measured pulsatile, three-dimensional flow with 4D-flow MRI and laser particle imaging velocimetry (PIV) as reference standard. Ten healthy participants underwent three cardiac MRI examinations each, consisting of cine-imaging, 2D-flow (aorta, pulmonary artery), and 2 × 2 accelerated 4D-flow with (Resp+) and without (Resp−) respiratory gating. Examinations were acquired consecutively on both scanners and one examination repeated within two weeks. Volume flow in the great vessels was compared between 2D- and 4D-flow. KE were calculated for all time phases and voxels in the left ventricle.

Results

Phantom results showed high accuracy and precision for both scanners. In vivo, higher accuracy and precision (P < 0.001) was found for volume flow for the Aera prototype with Resp+ (–3.7 ± 10.4 mL, r = 0.89) compared to the Achieva product sequence (–17.8 ± 18.6 mL, r = 0.56). 4D-flow Resp− on Aera had somewhat larger bias (–9.3 ± 9.6 mL, r = 0.90) compared to Resp+ (P = 0.005). KE measurements showed larger differences between scanners on the same day compared to the same scanner at different days.

Conclusion

Sequence-specific in vivo validation of 4D-flow is needed before clinical use. 4D-flow with the Aera prototype sequence with a clinically acceptable acquisition time (<10 min) showed acceptable bias in healthy controls to be considered for clinical use. Intra-individual KE comparisons should use the same sequence.

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 2017

There were 106 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2017, including 92 original research papers, 3 reviews, 9 technical notes, and 1 Position paper, 1 erratum and 1 correction. The volume was similar to 2016 despite an increase in manuscript submissions to 405 and thus reflects a slight decrease in the acceptance rate to 26.7%. The quality of the submissions continues to be high. The 2017 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2018) was minimally lower at 5.46 (vs. 5.71 for 2016; as published in June 2017), which is the second highest impact factor ever recorded for JCMR. The 2017 impact factor means that an average, each JCMR paper that were published in 2015 and 2016 was cited 5.46 times in 2017.In accordance with Open-Access publishing of Biomed Central, the JCMR articles are published on-line in continuus fashion and in the chronologic order of acceptance, with no collating of the articles into sections or special thematic issues. For this reason, over the years, the Editors have felt that it is useful to annually summarize the publications into broad areas of interest or theme, so that readers can view areas of interest in a single article in relation to each other and other contemporary JCMR articles. In this publication, the manuscripts are presented in broad themes and set in context with related literature and previously published JCMR papers to guide continuity of thought within the journal. In addition, I have elected to use this format to convey information regarding the editorial process to the readership.I hope that you find the open-access system increases wider reading and citation of your papers, and that you will continue to send your very best, high quality manuscripts to JCMR for consideration. I thank our very dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, and Reviewers for their efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner and that the JCMR continues to be recognized as the forefront journal of our field. And finally, I thank you for entrusting me with the editorship of the JCMR as I begin my 3rd year as your editor-in-chief. It has been a tremendous learning experience for me and the opportunity to review manuscripts that reflect the best in our field remains a great joy and highlight of my week!

Review of Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) 2015-2016 and transition of the JCMR office to Boston

The Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) is the official publication of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR). In 2016, the JCMR published 93 manuscripts, including 80 research papers, 6 reviews, 5 technical notes, 1 protocol, and 1 case report. The number of manuscripts published was similar to 2015 though with a 12% increase in manuscript submissions to an all-time high of 369. This reflects a decrease in the overall acceptance rate to <25% (excluding solicited reviews). The quality of submissions to JCMR continues to be high. The 2016 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2016 by Thomson Reuters) was steady at 5.601 (vs. 5.71 for 2015; as published in June 2016), which is the second highest impact factor ever recorded for JCMR. The 2016 impact factor means that the JCMR papers that were published in 2014 and 2015 were on-average cited 5.71 times in 2016.In accordance with Open-Access publishing of Biomed Central, the JCMR articles are published on-line in the order that they are accepted with no collating of the articles into sections or special thematic issues. For this reason, over the years, the Editors have felt that it is useful to annually summarize the publications into broad areas of interest or themes, so that readers can view areas of interest in a single article in relation to each other and other recent JCMR articles. The papers are presented in broad themes with previously published JCMR papers to guide continuity of thought in the journal. In addition, I have elected to open this publication with information for the readership regarding the transition of the JCMR editorial office to the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston and the editorial process.Though there is an author publication charge (APC) associated with open-access to cover the publisher's expenses, this format provides a much wider distribution/availability of the author's work and greater manuscript citation. For SCMR members, there is a substantial discount in the APC. I hope that you will continue to send your high quality manuscripts to JCMR for consideration. Importantly, I also ask that you consider referencing recent JCMR publications in your submissions to the JCMR and elsewhere as these contribute to our impact factor. I also thank our dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, and reviewers for their many efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner and that the JCMR continues to be recognized as the leading publication in our field.