Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Common Carotid Artery Volume Flow: A Comparison Study between Ultrasound Vector Flow Imaging and Phase Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{9487a6084d1e4bd9a3e56321c0bd04de,
title = "Common Carotid Artery Volume Flow: A Comparison Study between Ultrasound Vector Flow Imaging and Phase Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging",
abstract = "Volume flow estimation in the common carotid artery (CCA) can assess the absolute hemodynamic effect of a carotid stenosis. The aim of this study was to compare a commercial vector flow imaging (VFI) setup against the reference method magnetic resonance phase contrast angiography (MRA) for volume flow estimation in the CCA. Ten healthy volunteers were scanned with VFI and MRA over the CCA. VFI had an improved precision of 19.2% compared to MRA of 31.9% (p = 0.061). VFI estimated significantly lower volume flow than MRA (mean difference: 63.2 mL/min, p = 0.017), whilst the correlation between VFI and MRA was strong (R2 = 0.81, p < 0.0001). A Bland-Altman plot indicated a systematic bias. After bias correction, the percentage error was reduced from 41.0% to 25.2%. This study indicated that a VFI setup for volume flow estimation is precise and strongly correlated to MRA volume flow estimation, and after correcting for the systematic bias, VFI and MRA become interchangeable.",
keywords = "Common carotid artery, Phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging, Vector flow imaging, Volume flow",
author = "Brandt, {Andreas Hjelm} and Olesen, {Jacob Bjerring} and Ramin Moshavegh and Jensen, {J{\o}rgen Arendt} and Nielsen, {Michael Bachmann} and Hansen, {Kristoffer Lindskov}",
year = "2021",
month = sep,
doi = "10.3390/neurolint13030028",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "269--278",
journal = "Neurology international",
issn = "2035-8385",
publisher = "Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Common Carotid Artery Volume Flow

T2 - A Comparison Study between Ultrasound Vector Flow Imaging and Phase Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging

AU - Brandt, Andreas Hjelm

AU - Olesen, Jacob Bjerring

AU - Moshavegh, Ramin

AU - Jensen, Jørgen Arendt

AU - Nielsen, Michael Bachmann

AU - Hansen, Kristoffer Lindskov

PY - 2021/9

Y1 - 2021/9

N2 - Volume flow estimation in the common carotid artery (CCA) can assess the absolute hemodynamic effect of a carotid stenosis. The aim of this study was to compare a commercial vector flow imaging (VFI) setup against the reference method magnetic resonance phase contrast angiography (MRA) for volume flow estimation in the CCA. Ten healthy volunteers were scanned with VFI and MRA over the CCA. VFI had an improved precision of 19.2% compared to MRA of 31.9% (p = 0.061). VFI estimated significantly lower volume flow than MRA (mean difference: 63.2 mL/min, p = 0.017), whilst the correlation between VFI and MRA was strong (R2 = 0.81, p < 0.0001). A Bland-Altman plot indicated a systematic bias. After bias correction, the percentage error was reduced from 41.0% to 25.2%. This study indicated that a VFI setup for volume flow estimation is precise and strongly correlated to MRA volume flow estimation, and after correcting for the systematic bias, VFI and MRA become interchangeable.

AB - Volume flow estimation in the common carotid artery (CCA) can assess the absolute hemodynamic effect of a carotid stenosis. The aim of this study was to compare a commercial vector flow imaging (VFI) setup against the reference method magnetic resonance phase contrast angiography (MRA) for volume flow estimation in the CCA. Ten healthy volunteers were scanned with VFI and MRA over the CCA. VFI had an improved precision of 19.2% compared to MRA of 31.9% (p = 0.061). VFI estimated significantly lower volume flow than MRA (mean difference: 63.2 mL/min, p = 0.017), whilst the correlation between VFI and MRA was strong (R2 = 0.81, p < 0.0001). A Bland-Altman plot indicated a systematic bias. After bias correction, the percentage error was reduced from 41.0% to 25.2%. This study indicated that a VFI setup for volume flow estimation is precise and strongly correlated to MRA volume flow estimation, and after correcting for the systematic bias, VFI and MRA become interchangeable.

KW - Common carotid artery

KW - Phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging

KW - Vector flow imaging

KW - Volume flow

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85109208616&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3390/neurolint13030028

DO - 10.3390/neurolint13030028

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 34201493

VL - 13

SP - 269

EP - 278

JO - Neurology international

JF - Neurology international

SN - 2035-8385

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 66791704