Kat-ARC accelerated 4D flow CMR: clinical validation for transvalvular flow and peak velocity assessment

Clinical relevance of aortic conduit and reservoir function

BACKGROUND

Aortic conduit and reservoir functions can be directly measured by four-dimensional flow (4D flow) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR).

METHODS

Twenty healthy controls (10 young and 10 age-gender-matched old controls) and 20 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) were recruited. All had 4D flow CMR. Flow was quantified at the ascending and descending aorta levels. In addition, at the ascending aorta level, we quantified systolic flow displacement (FDs) and systolic flow reversal ratio (sFRR). The aortic conduit function was defined as the relative drop in systolic flow from the ascending to the descending aorta (∆Fs). Aortic reservoir function was defined as descending aortic diastolic stroke volume (DAo SVd).

RESULTS

Both ∆Fs (R=0.51, p=0.001) and DAo SVd (R=-0.68, p=0.001) were significantly associated with ageing. Native T1 (R=0.51, p=0.001) and extracellular volume (R=0.51, p=0.001) showed maximum association with ∆Fs. ∆Fs significantly increased in HFpEF versus age-gender-matched controls (41±8% vs 52±12%, p=0.02). In multiple regression, only ∆Fs and DAo SVd were independent predictors of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (model R=0.77, p=0.0001). FDs was significantly associated with ∆Fs (R=0.4, p=0.01) and DAo SVd (R=-0.48, p=0.002), whereas sFRR was mainly associated with DAo SVd (R=-0.46, p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Both aortic conduit and reservoir function decline with age and this decline in aortic function is also independently associated with renal functional decline. Ascending aortic turbulent flow signatures are associated with loss of aortic conduit and reservoir functions. Finally, in HFpEF, aortic conduit and reservoir function demonstrate progressive decline.

TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05114785.

Assessment of Tricuspid Regurgitation by Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Current Role and Future Applications

Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a prevalent valvular disease with a significant mortality rate. The evaluation of TR severity and associated right heart remodeling and dysfunction is crucial to determine the optimal therapeutic strategy and to improve prognosis. While echocardiography remains the first-line imaging technique to evaluate TR, it has many limitations, both operator- and patient-related. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has emerged as an innovative and comprehensive non-invasive cardiac imaging technique with additional value beyond routine echocardiographic assessment. Besides its established role as the gold standard for the evaluation of cardiac volumes, CMR can add important insights with regard to valvular anatomy and function. Accurate quantification of TR severity, including calculation of regurgitant volume and fraction, can be performed using either the well-known indirect volumetric method or novel 4D flow imaging. In addition, CMR can be used to assess the impact on the right heart, including right heart remodeling, function and tissue characterization. Several CMR-derived parameters have been associated with outcome, highlighting the importance of multi-modality imaging in patients with TR. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the current role of CMR in the assessment and management of patients with TR and its future applications.

Direct comparison of whole heart quantifications between different retrospective and prospective gated 4D flow CMR acquisitions

Introduction

4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is a versatile technique to non-invasively assess cardiovascular hemodynamics. With developing technology, choice in sequences and acquisition parameters is expanding and it is important to assess if data acquired with these different variants can be directly compared, especially when combining datasets within research studies. For example, sequences may allow a choice in gating techniques or be limited to one method, yet there is not a direct comparison investigating how gating selection impacts quantifications of the great vessels, semilunar and atrioventricular valves and ventricles. Thus, this study investigated if quantifications across the heart from contemporary 4D flow sequences are comparable between two commonly used 4D flow sequences reliant on different ECG gating techniques.

Methods

Forty participants (33 healthy controls, seven patients with coronary artery disease and abnormal diastolic function) were prospectively recruited into a single-centre observational study to undergo a 3T-CMR exam. Two acquisitions, a k-t GRAPPA 4D flow with prospective gating (4Dprosp) and a modern compressed sensing 4D flow with retrospective gating (4Dretro), were acquired in each participant. Images were analyzed for volumes, flow rates and velocities in the vessels and four valves, and for biventricular kinetic energy and flow components. Data was compared for group differences with paired t-tests and for agreement with Bland-Altman and intraclass correlation (ICC).

Results

Measurements primarily occurring during systole of the great vessels, semilunar valves and both left and right ventricles did not differ between acquisition types (p > 0.05 from t-test) and yielded good to excellent agreement (ICC: 0.75-0.99). Similar findings were observed for the majority of parameters dependent on early diastole. However, measurements occurring in late diastole or those reliant on the entire-cardiac cycle such as flow component volumes along with diastolic kinetic energy values were not similar between 4Dprosp and 4Dretro acquisitions resulting in poor agreement (ICC < 0.50).

Discussion

Direct comparison of measurements between two different 4D flow acquisitions reliant on different gating methods demonstrated systolic and early diastolic markers across the heart should be compatible when comparing these two 4D flow sequences. On the other hand, late diastolic and intraventricular parameters should be compared with caution.

Measuring global cerebrovascular pulsatility transmission using 4D flow MRI

Pulse wave encephalopathy (PWE) is hypothesised to initiate many forms of dementia, motivating its identification and risk assessment. As candidate pulsatility based biomarkers for PWE, pulsatility index and pulsatility damping have been studied and, currently, do not adequately stratify risk due to variability in pulsatility and spatial bias. Here, we propose a locus-independent pulsatility transmission coefficient computed by spatially tracking pulsatility along vessels to characterise the brain pulse dynamics at a whole-organ level. Our preliminary analyses in a cohort of 20 subjects indicate that this measurement agrees with clinical observations relating blood pulsatility with age, heart rate, and sex, making it a suitable candidate to study the risk of PWE. We identified transmission differences between vascular regions perfused by the basilar and internal carotid arteries attributed to the identified dependence on cerebral blood flow, and some participants presented differences between the internal carotid perfused regions that were not related to flow or pulsatility burden, suggesting underlying mechanical differences. Large populational studies would benefit from retrospective pulsatility transmission analyses, providing a new comprehensive arterial description of the hemodynamic state in the brain. We provide a publicly available implementation of our tools to derive this coefficient, built into pre-existing open-source software.

Validation of 2D flow MRI for helical and vortical flows

PURPOSE

The main objective of this study was to develop two-dimensional (2D) phase contrast (PC) methods to quantify the helicity and vorticity of blood flow in the aortic root.

METHODS

This proof-of-concept study used four-dimensional (4D) flow cardiovascular MR (4D flow CMR) data of five healthy controls, five patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and five patients with aortic stenosis (AS). A PC through-plane generated by 4D flow data was treated as a 2D PC plane and compared with the original 4D flow. Visual assessment of flow vectors was used to assess helicity and vorticity. We quantified flow displacement (FD), systolic flow reversal ratio (sFRR) and rotational angle (RA) using 2D PC.

RESULTS

For visual vortex flow presence near the inner curvature of the ascending aortic root on 4D flow CMR, sFRR demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.955, p<0.001. A threshold of >8% for sFRR had a sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 100% for visual vortex presence. In addition, the average late systolic FD, a marker of flow eccentricity, also demonstrated an AUC of 0.909, p<0.001 for visual vortex flow. Manual systolic rotational flow angle change (ΔsRA) demonstrated excellent association with semiautomated ΔsRA (r=0.99, 95% CI 0.9907 to 0.999, p<0.001). In reproducibility testing, average systolic FD (FDsavg) showed a minimal bias at 1.28% with a high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC=0.92). Similarly, sFRR had a minimal bias of 1.14% with an ICC of 0.96. ΔsRA demonstrated an acceptable bias of 5.72°-and an ICC of 0.99.

CONCLUSION

2D PC flow imaging can possibly quantify blood flow helicity (ΔRA) and vorticity (FRR). These imaging biomarkers of flow helicity and vorticity demonstrate high reproducibility for clinical adoption.

TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05114785.

Aortic flow is abnormal in HFpEF

Aims

Turbulent aortic flow makes the cardiovascular system less effective. It remains unknown if patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have disturbed aortic flow. This study sought to investigate advanced markers of aortic flow disturbances in HFpEF.

Methods

This case-controlled observational study used four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance derived, two-dimensional phase-contrast reformatted plane data at an orthogonal plane just above the sino-tubular junction. We recruited 10 young healthy controls (HCs), 10 old HCs and 23 patients with HFpEF. We analysed average systolic aortic flow displacement (FDsavg), systolic flow reversal ratio (sFRR) and pulse wave velocity (PWV). In a sub-group analysis, we compared old HCs versus age-gender-matched HFpEF (N=10).

Results

Differences were significant in mean age (P<0.001) among young HCs (22.9±3.5 years), old HCs (60.5±10.2 years) and HFpEF patients (73.7±9.7 years). FDsavg, sFRR and PWV varied significantly (P<0.001) in young HCs (8±4%, 2±2%, 4±2m/s), old HCs (16±5%, 7±6%, 11±8m/s), and HFpEF patients (23±10%, 11±10%, 8±3). No significant PWV differences existed between old HCs and HFpEF.HFpEF had significantly higher FDsavg versus old HCs (23±10% vs 16±5%, P<0.001). A FDsavg > 17.7% achieved 74% sensitivity, 70% specificity for differentiating them. sFRR was notably higher in HFpEF (11±10% vs 7±6%, P<0.001). A sFRR > 7.3% yielded 78% sensitivity, 70% specificity in differentiating these groups. In sub-group analysis, FDsavg remained distinctly elevated in HFpEF (22.4±9.7% vs 16±4.9%, P=0.029). FDsavg of >16% showed 100% sensitivity and 70% specificity (P=0.01). Similarly, sFRR remained significantly higher in HFpEF (11.3±9.5% vs 6.6±6.4%, P=0.007). A sFRR of >7.2% showed 100% sensitivity and 60% specificity (P<0.001).

Conclusion

Aortic flow haemodynamics namely FDsavg and sFRR are significantly affected in ageing and HFpEF patients.

Cardiac MR modelling of systolic and diastolic blood pressure

AIMS

Blood pressure (BP) is a crucial factor in cardiovascular health and can affect cardiac imaging assessments. However, standard outpatient cardiovascular MR (CMR) imaging procedures do not typically include BP measurements prior to image acquisition. This study proposes that brachial systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) can be modelled using patient characteristics and CMR data.

METHODS

In this multicentre study, 57 patients from the PREFER-CMR registry and 163 patients from other registries were used as the derivation cohort. All subjects had their brachial SBP and DBP measured using a sphygmomanometer. Multivariate linear regression analysis was applied to predict brachial BP. The model was subsequently validated in a cohort of 169 healthy individuals.

RESULTS

Age and left ventricular ejection fraction were associated with SBP. Aortic forward flow, body surface area and left ventricular mass index were associated with DBP. When applied to the validation cohort, the correlation coefficient between CMR-derived SBP and brachial SBP was (r=0.16, 95% CI 0.011 to 0.305, p=0.03), and CMR-derived DBP and brachial DBP was (r=0.27, 95% CI 0.122 to 0.403, p=0.0004). The area under the curve (AUC) for CMR-derived SBP to predict SBP>120 mmHg was 0.59, p=0.038. Moreover, CMR-derived DBP to predict DBP>80 mmHg had an AUC of 0.64, p=0.002.

CONCLUSION

CMR-derived SBP and DBP models can estimate brachial SBP and DBP. Such models may allow efficient prospective collection, as well as retrospective estimation of BP, which should be incorporated into assessments due to its critical effect on load-dependent parameters.

The Importance of Mitral Valve Prolapse Doming Volume in the Assessment of Left Ventricular Stroke Volume with Cardiac MRI

There remains a debate whether the ventricular volume within prolapsing mitral valve (MV) leaflets should be included in the left ventricular (LV) end-systolic volume, and therefore factored in LV stroke volume (SV), in cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) assessments. This study aims to compare LV volumes during end-systolic phases, with and without the inclusion of the volume of blood on the left atrial aspect of the atrioventricular groove but still within the MV prolapsing leaflets, against the reference LV SV by four-dimensional flow (4DF). A total of 15 patients with MV prolapse (MVP) were retrospectively enrolled in this study. We compared LV SV with (LV SVMVP) and without (LV SVstandard) MVP left ventricular doming volume, using 4D flow (LV SV4DF) as the reference value. Significant differences were observed when comparing LV SVstandard and LV SVMVP (p < 0.001), and between LV SVstandard and LV SV4DF (p = 0.02). The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) test demonstrated good repeatability between LV SVMVP and LV SV4DF (ICC = 0.86, p < 0.001) but only moderate repeatability between LV SVstandard and LV SV4DF (ICC = 0.75, p < 0.01). Calculating LV SV by including the MVP left ventricular doming volume has a higher consistency with LV SV derived from the 4DF assessment. In conclusion, LV SV short-axis cine assessment incorporating MVP dooming volume can significantly improve the precision of LV SV assessment compared to the reference 4DF method. Hence, in cases with bi-leaflet MVP, we recommend factoring in MVP dooming into the left ventricular end-systolic volume to improve the accuracy and precision of quantifying mitral regurgitation.

Automated 4D flow cardiac MRI pipeline to derive peak mitral inflow diastolic velocities using short-axis cine stack: two centre validation study against echocardiographic pulse-wave doppler

BACKGROUND

Measurement of peak velocities is important in the evaluation of heart failure. This study compared the performance of automated 4D flow cardiac MRI (CMR) with traditional transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTE) for the measurement of mitral inflow peak diastolic velocities.

METHODS

Patients with Doppler echocardiography and 4D flow cardiac magnetic resonance data were included retrospectively. An established automated technique was used to segment the left ventricular transvalvular flow using short-axis cine stack of images. Peak mitral E-wave and peak mitral A-wave velocities were automatically derived using in-plane velocity maps of transvalvular flow. Additionally, we checked the agreement between peak mitral E-wave velocity derived by 4D flow CMR and Doppler echocardiography in patients with sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation (AF) separately.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients were included (median age 69 years, IQR 63 to 76; 46% female). Data were split into three groups according to heart rhythm. The median peak E-wave mitral inflow velocity by automated 4D flow CMR was comparable with Doppler echocardiography in all patients (0.90 ± 0.43 m/s vs 0.94 ± 0.48 m/s, P = 0.132), sinus rhythm-only group (0.88 ± 0.35 m/s vs 0.86 ± 0.38 m/s, P = 0.54) and in AF-only group (1.33 ± 0.56 m/s vs 1.18 ± 0.47 m/s, P = 0.06). Peak A-wave mitral inflow velocity results had no significant difference between Doppler TTE and automated 4D flow CMR (0.81 ± 0.44 m/s vs 0.81 ± 0.53 m/s, P = 0.09) in all patients and sinus rhythm-only groups. Automated 4D flow CMR showed a significant correlation with TTE for measurement of peak E-wave in all patients group (r = 0.73, P < 0.001) and peak A-wave velocities (r = 0.88, P < 0.001). Moreover, there was a significant correlation between automated 4D flow CMR and TTE for peak-E wave velocity in sinus rhythm-only patients (r = 0.68, P < 0.001) and AF-only patients (r = 0.81, P = 0.014). Excellent intra-and inter-observer variability was demonstrated for both parameters.

CONCLUSION

Automated dynamic peak mitral inflow diastolic velocity tracing using 4D flow CMR is comparable to Doppler echocardiography and has excellent repeatability for clinical use. However, 4D flow CMR can potentially underestimate peak velocity in patients with AF.