What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Observational. Population: Healthy volunteers (n=10). Intervention: Phase contrast MRI breath-hold techniques and image positions. Primary outcome: Stroke volume (SV).

What does this research mean for the field?

Stroke volume measurements using phase contrast MRI do not differ significantly between breath-hold methods, but stroke volume measured at the left ventricular outflow tract is significantly lower than at the ascending aorta, sino-tubular junction, and valsalva sinus. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

January 1, 2015Open Access

An Examination of Variable Image Positions in the Aortic Valve Blood Flow Using Phase Contrast MRI: Effect of Breath-holding Methods in Healthy Volunteers

Key Result

Stroke volume measurements using PC-MRI did not differ significantly between breath-hold methods, but LVOT stroke volume was significantly lower than Ao, STJ, and valsalva positions.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=10)

Structured PICO

Does breath-holding technique or image position affect stroke volume measurement using PC-MRI in healthy volunteers?

Population

10 healthy volunteers (8 male, 2 female, age 23-33, mean age 28.1 years)

Intervention

Phase contrast MRI (PC-MRI) using different breath-holding techniques (maximum inspiration, maximum expiration, and free-breathing with navigator-echo) and image positions (ascending aorta [Ao], sino-tubular junction [STJ], valsalva sinus [valsalva], left ventricular outflow tract [LVOT])

Comparator

Comparison among the different breath-holding techniques and image positions

Outcome

Stroke volume (SV) measured at each slice position and breath-hold techniquesurrogate

In healthy volunteers, PC-MRI stroke volume measurements are not significantly affected by breath-holding methods, but measurements at the LVOT are significantly lower than at the ascending aorta, STJ, or valsalva sinus.

Abstract

Phase contrast MRI (PC-MRI) is a useful tool for evaluating valvular pathology. In addition, PC-MRI can provide a noninvasive assessment of blood flow in an arbitrary cross section. However, the blood flow measurement with breath-hold or free breath PC-MRI may be different from each other because of intrathoracic pressure changing and variable image position. The aim of this study was to find both the optimal breath-hold technique and the image position. Quantitative flow images were acquired in four planes (ascending aorta: Ao, sino-tubular junction: STJ, valsalva sinus: valsalva, left ventricular outflow tract: LVOT), in healthy subjects (n=10). The study protocol was divided into two parts: (1) stroke volume (SV) measured in each slice positions by using inspiration, expiration, and navigation method during normal breathing and (2) SV measured at each breath-hold techniques in the Ao, STJ, valsalva, and LVOT. As a result, (1) SV of the respective measurement positions were not significant by using inspiration, expiration, and navigation method and (2) LVOT SV was significantly lower than Ao, STJ, and valsalva.

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Nakagawa et al. (Thu,) conducted a observational in Healthy volunteers (n=10). Phase contrast MRI breath-hold techniques and image positions was evaluated on Stroke volume (SV). Stroke volume measurements using PC-MRI did not differ significantly between breath-hold methods, but LVOT stroke volume was significantly lower than Ao, STJ, and valsalva positions.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a159b5d79ff98d0de4ee143 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.6009/jjrt.2015_jsrt_71.12.1230

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

Bookmark

View Full Paper