Key Points
- To evaluate the feasibility, reproducibility, and accuracy of measuring aortic regurgitation quantitatively using magnetic resonance velocity mapping.
- Evaluated 5 healthy volunteers and 26 patients (mean age, 60.3 years; range, 25-83 years) using 1.5-T cine gradient-echo MR imaging with velocity encoding across 32 cardiac phases.
- Calculated antegrade and regurgitant flow by integrating the cross-sectional area and mean velocity of the ascending aorta across the cardiac cycle to derive regurgitant fraction (RF).
- Determined inter- and intraobserver reproducibility and compared MR-derived RF with Doppler echocardiography (n=26) and aortography (n=9).
- Interobserver variation for RF was low (r = .956, SEE = 1.2%, n = 31), and intraobserver variation was minimal (r = .998, SEE = 0.35%, n = 10).
- MR-measured regurgitant fraction agreed well with conventional grading established by Doppler echocardiography (n = 26) and invasive aortography (n = 9).
Structured PICO
Does MR imaging velocity mapping accurately and reproducibly quantify aortic regurgitation compared to Doppler echocardiography and aortography?
PPopulation31 individuals (5 healthy volunteers and 26 patients with aortic regurgitation), mean age 60.3 years (range 25-83 years).
IInterventionMagnetic resonance (MR) imaging velocity mapping (cine transverse images of the ascending aorta using a gradient-echo sequence with a velocity-encoding bipolar pulse at 1.5-T).
CComparatorDoppler echocardiographic (n=26) and aortographic (n=9) grading of aortic regurgitation.
OOutcomeRegurgitant fraction (RF) measurement reproducibility (inter- and intraobserver variation) and agreement with Doppler echocardiography and aortography.surrogate
MR velocity mapping provides a reproducible, quantitative, and noninvasive method for measuring aortic regurgitation that agrees well with Doppler echocardiography and aortography.