Key result
Double-gated 4D Flow provided equivalent net and peak flow quantification compared to navigator-gated 4D Flow and 2D PC-MRI (P>0.5) while reducing phase artifacts.
Why the study?
Does double gating from ECG and a pressure-driven belly-belt maintain continuous steady-state during 4D flow MRI in healthy volunteers?
Cross-Sectional (n=8)
No
Does double gating from ECG and a pressure-driven belly-belt maintain continuous steady-state during 4D flow MRI in healthy volunteers?
A proposed double gating technique using ECG and a pressure-driven belly-belt aims to maintain continuous steady-state during 4D flow MRI acquisition.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May reduce phase artifacts in 4D flow MRI without compromising quantification in volunteers; hypothesis-generating for clinical use.
Background 4D Phase-Contrast MRI (4D Flow”) has become a choice modality for assessment of flow patterns in complex vasculatures, such as congenital heart diseases. For thoracic imaging, the technique relies on ECG-triggering and an imaging navigator to compensate for breathing motion [Markl-JMRI2007]. The acquisition of the navigator requires switching off the 4D flow acquisition, thus breaking the steady-state and missing a phase in the cardiac cycle. We propose to use double gating from ECG and a pressure-driven belly-belt to monitor breathing motion while maintaining continuous steady-state.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rapacchi et al. (2015) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy volunteers (n=8). Double-gated 4D Flow (BEL4D) vs. Navigator gating 4D Flow (NAV4D) and 2D PC-MRI (BEL2D) was evaluated on Net flow and peak flow in main vessels (p=>0.5). Double-gated 4D Flow provided equivalent net and peak flow quantification compared to navigator-gated 4D Flow and 2D PC-MRI (P>0.5) while reducing phase artifacts.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: