Key result
Quantitative 4D flow accelerated with SENSE at 3 T accurately measured stroke volume compared to 2D-flow (96.7 vs 97.3 ml, p=0.86), whereas k-t BLAST significantly underestimated flow velocities.
Why the study?
Does 4D-flow MRI accelerated with SENSE or k-t BLAST accurately quantify and visualize cardiovascular flow compared to standard 2D-flow in healthy volunteers?
Population
13 healthy volunteers, mean age 32 ± 12 years, 9 males.
Comparison
Cardiac 4D-flow MRI accelerated with SENSE and… vs Standard 2D-flow MRI acquisitions of the aorta…
Design
Cross-sectional, Scanned in both a 1.5 T and 3 T scanner on the same day in…
Authors
Loading...
Supports SENSE-accelerated 4D-flow for quantitative assessment in volunteers; leaves open validation and clinical translation in patients.
Observational (n=13)
Single-blind
Random order
No
Does 4D-flow MRI accelerated with SENSE or k-t BLAST accurately quantify and visualize cardiovascular flow compared to standard 2D-flow in healthy volunteers?
Absolute Event Rate: 96.7% vs 97.3%
p-value: p=0.86
4D-flow MRI accelerated with SENSE at 3 T provides accurate quantitative flow assessment, while k-t BLAST is currently limited to qualitative visualization due to velocity underestimation.
Carlsson et al. (2011) conducted an observational in Healthy volunteers (n=13). 4D-flow accelerated with SENSE vs. 2D-flow was evaluated on Stroke volume on 3 T 4D-SENSE (p=0.86). Quantitative 4D flow accelerated with SENSE at 3 T accurately measured stroke volume compared to 2D-flow (96.7 vs 97.3 ml, p=0.86), whereas k-t BLAST significantly underestimated flow velocities.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: