Key result
Glenn and Fontan patients had significantly higher systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow compared to controls when measured by 4D flow MRI (0.67 vs -0.07 l/min/m2, p<0.001), though results varied by the calculation formula used.
Why the study?
Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow is well recognized in single ventricle physiology but remains difficult to quantify, prompting an evaluation of calculation formulas using 4D flow MRI.
Can 4D flow MRI accurately quantify systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with univentricular physiology using different formulas?
Case-Control (n=24)
No
Can 4D flow MRI accurately quantify systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with univentricular physiology using different formulas?
4D flow MRI can detect increased systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in Glenn and Fontan patients, but quantification varies significantly depending on the formula used, necessitating further research before clinical application.
4D flow MRI detects higher collateral flow in univentricular patients; leaves open formula standardization before clinical adoption.
Purpose: Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow is a well-recognised phenomenon in patients with single ventricle physiology, but remains difficult to quantify. The aim was to compare the reported formula’s that have been used for calculation of systemic-to-pulmonary-collateral flow to assess their consistency and to quantify systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with a Glenn and/or Fontan circulation using four-dimensional flow MRI (4D flow MR). Methods: Retrospective case–control study of Glenn and Fontan patients who had a 4D flow MR study. Flows were measured at the ascending aorta, left and right pulmonary arteries, left and right pulmonary veins, and both caval veins. Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow was calculated using two formulas: 1) pulmonary veins – pulmonary arteries and 2) ascending aorta – caval veins. Anatomical identification of collaterals was performed using the 4D MR image set. Results: Fourteen patients (n = 11 Fontan, n = 3 Glenn) were included (age 26 [22–30] years). Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow was significantly higher in the patients than the controls (n = 10, age 31.2 [15.1–38.4] years) with both formulas: 0.28 [0.09–0.5] versus 0.04 [−0.66–0.21] l/min/m2 (p = 0.036, formula 1) and 0.67 [0.24–0.88] versus -0.07 [−0.16–0.08] l/min/m2 (p < 0.001, formula 2). In patients, systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow differed significantly between formulas 1 and 2 (13% versus 26% of aortic flow, p = 0.038). In seven patients, veno-venous collaterals were detected and no aortopulmonary collaterals were visualised. Conclusion: 4D flow MR is able to detect increased systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow and visualise collaterals vessels in Glenn and Fontan patients. However, the amount of systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow varies with the formula employed. Therefore, further research is necessary before it could be applied in clinical care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ridderbos et al. (2022) conducted a case-control in Univentricular physiology (Glenn or Fontan circulation) (n=24). Glenn or Fontan circulation vs. Healthy controls without structural or functional cardiovascular abnormalities was evaluated on Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow (systemic estimator formula) (p=<0.001). Glenn and Fontan patients had significantly higher systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow compared to controls when measured by 4D flow MRI (0.67 vs -0.07 l/min/m2, p<0.001), though results varied by the calculation formula used.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: