Key result
Ultrasound vector flow imaging showed good agreement with 4-D flow MRI for measuring peak velocities in the femoral bifurcation, with a mean difference of 1.4 cm/s for echoPIV and 0.3 cm/s for BST.
Why the study?
Local flow dynamics impact atherosclerosis but are difficult to quantify using conventional ultrasound techniques.
Does ultrasound vector flow imaging accurately quantify blood flow in the healthy femoral bifurcation compared to 4-D flow MRI?
Cross-Sectional (n=20)
Does ultrasound vector flow imaging accurately quantify blood flow in the healthy femoral bifurcation compared to 4-D flow MRI?
Mean Difference: 1.4 (95% CI -18.7–21.6)
2-D blood-flow quantification of the femoral bifurcation is feasible with echoPIV and BST, showing good agreement with 4-D flow MRI without the need for contrast agents.
Demonstrates early feasibility for advanced flow quantification in peripheral arteries; leaves open whether this technique improves atherosclerotic.
OBJECTIVE: Local flow dynamics impact atherosclerosis yet are difficult to quantify with conventional ultrasound techniques. This study investigates the performance of ultrasound vector flow imaging (US-VFI) with and without ultrasound contrast agents in the healthy femoral bifurcation. METHODS: High-frame-rate ultrasound data with incremental acoustic outputs were acquired in the femoral bifurcations of 20 healthy subjects before (50V) and after contrast injection (2V, 5V and 10V). 2-D blood-velocity profiles were obtained through native blood speckle tracking (BST) and contrast tracking (echo particle image velocimetry [echoPIV]). As a reference, 4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging (4-D flow MRI) was acquired. Contrast-to-background ratio and vector correlation were used to assess the quality of the US-VFI acquisitions. Spatiotemporal velocity profiles were extracted, from which peak velocities (PSV) were compared between the modalities. Furthermore, root-mean-square error analysis was performed. RESULTS: US-VFI was successful in 99% of the cases and optimal VFI quality was established with the 10V echoPIV and BST settings. A good correspondence between 10V echoPIV and BST was found, with a mean PSV difference of -0.5 cm/s (limits of agreement: -14.1-13.2). Both US-VFI techniques compared well with 4-D flow MRI, with a mean PSV difference of 1.4 cm/s (-18.7-21.6) between 10V echoPIV and MRI, and 0.3 cm/s (-23.8-24.4) between BST and MRI. Similar complex flow patterns among all modalities were observed. CONCLUSION: 2-D blood-flow quantification of femoral bifurcation is feasible with echoPIV and BST. Both modalities showed good agreement compared to 4-D flow MRI. For the femoral tract the administration of contrast was not needed to increase the echogenicity of the blood for optimal image quality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Helvert et al. (2024) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy femoral bifurcation (n=20). Ultrasound vector flow imaging (US-VFI) with and without contrast vs. 4-D flow magnetic resonance imaging (4-D flow MRI) was evaluated on Peak velocities (PSV) (Mean difference 1.4 cm/s, 95% CI -18.7-21.6). Ultrasound vector flow imaging showed good agreement with 4-D flow MRI for measuring peak velocities in the femoral bifurcation, with a mean difference of 1.4 cm/s for echoPIV and 0.3 cm/s for BST.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: