Key result
Simultaneous vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow imaging identified backflow in 66% of diseased patients compared with <10% of other patients (p≤0.05).
Why the study?
Clinical feasibility of simultaneous high-frame-rate vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow imaging was evaluated to potentially improve arterial health assessment and estimation of plaque vulnerability.
Does simultaneous vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow imaging allow for feasible extraction of clinical markers to differentiate healthy and diseased carotids?
Observational (n=43)
Does simultaneous vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow imaging allow for feasible extraction of clinical markers to differentiate healthy and diseased carotids?
Absolute Event Rate: 66% vs 10%
p-value: p=≤ 0.05
Simultaneous high-frame-rate imaging of vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow is clinically feasible and can differentiate between healthy and diseased carotids using markers like artery diameter, backflow, and pulse wave velocity.
Pilot data support technical feasibility; leaves open whether high-frame-rate imaging improves plaque assessment in practice.
This study aims to investigate the clinical feasibility of simultaneous extraction of vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow at high frame rates for both extraction of clinical markers and visual inspection. If available in the clinic, such a technique would allow a better estimation of plaque vulnerability and improved evaluation of the overall arterial health of patients. In this study, both healthy volunteers and patients were recruited and scanned using a planewave acquisition scheme that provided a data set of 43 carotid recordings in total. The vessel wall motion was extracted based on the complex autocorrelation of the signals received, while the vector flow was extracted using the transverse oscillation technique. Wall motion and vector flow were extracted at high frame rates, which allowed for a visual appreciation of tissue movement and blood flow simultaneously. Several clinical markers were extracted, and visual inspections of the wall motion and flow were conducted. From all the potential markers, young healthy volunteers had smaller artery diameter (7.72 mm) compared with diseased patients (9.56 mm) ( p -value ≤ 0.001), 66% of diseased patients had backflow compared with less than 10% for the other patients ( p -value ≤ 0.05), a carotid with a pulse wave velocity extracted from the wall velocity greater than 7 m/s was always a diseased vessel, and the peak wall shear rate decreased as the risk increases. Based on both the pathological markers and the visual inspection of tissue motion and vector flow, we conclude that the clinical feasibility of this approach is demonstrated. Larger and more disease-specific studies using such an approach will lead to better understanding and evaluation of vessels, which can translate to future use in the clinic.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perrot et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Carotid artery disease (n=43). Simultaneous vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow imaging vs. Healthy volunteers was evaluated on Presence of backflow (p=≤ 0.05). Simultaneous vessel wall motion and vectorial blood flow imaging identified backflow in 66% of diseased patients compared with <10% of other patients (p≤0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: