The k-t GRAPPA accelerated 4D-flow sequence significantly reduced mean scan time by 46% compared to standard GRAPPA (9:40 min vs 17:56 min, p=0.002) while providing fewer motion artefacts and comparable flow quantification.
Cross-Sectional (n=40)
Blinded reading
Randomized order of reading
No
Does a k-t GRAPPA accelerated 4D-flow MRI sequence improve scan time and image quality compared to standard GRAPPA without compromising aortic flow quantification accuracy?
k-t GRAPPA accelerated 4D-flow MRI significantly reduces scan time and motion artifacts compared to standard GRAPPA while maintaining high accuracy for aortic flow quantification.
Effect estimate: 46.12% reduction
Absolute Event Rate: 9.67% vs 17.93%
p-value: p=0.002
To compare two broadly used 4D-flow- with a 2D-flow-sequence in healthy volunteers, regarding absolute flow parameters, image quality (IQ), and eddy current correction (ECC). Forty volunteers (42 ± 11.8 years, 22 females) were examined with a 3T scanner. Thoracic aortic flow was assessed using a 3D-T2w-SPACE-STIR-sequence for morphology and two accelerated 4D-flow sequences for comparison, one with k-t undersampling and one with standard GRAPPA parallel-imaging. 2D-flow was used as reference standard. The custom-made software tool Bloodline enabled flow measurements for all analyses at the same location. Quantitative flow analyses were performed with and without ECC. One reader assessed pathline IQ (IQ-PATH) and occurrence of motion artefacts (IQ-ART) on a 3-point grading scale, the higher the better. k-t GRAPPA allowed a significant mean scan time reduction of 46% (17:56 ± 5:26 min vs. 10:40 ± 3:15 min) and provided significantly fewer motion artefacts than standard GRAPPA (IQ-ART 1.57 ± 0.55 vs. 0.84 ± 0.48; p < 0.001). Neither 4D-flow sequence significantly differed in flow volume nor peak velocity results with or without ECC. Nevertheless, the correlation between both 4D-flow sequences and 2D-flow was better with ECC; the k-t GRAPPA sequence performed best (R = 0.96 vs. 0.90). k-t GRAPPA 4D-flow was not inferior to a standard GRAPPA-sequence, showed fewer artefacts, comparable IQ and was almost two-fold faster.
Ebel et al. (Fri,) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy volunteers (n=40). k-t GRAPPA accelerated 4D-flow sequence vs. Standard GRAPPA 4D-flow sequence was evaluated on Mean acquisition time (46.12% reduction, p=0.002). The k-t GRAPPA accelerated 4D-flow sequence significantly reduced mean scan time by 46% compared to standard GRAPPA (9:40 min vs 17:56 min, p=0.002) while providing fewer motion artefacts and comparable flow quantification.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: