The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement between flow/velocity data obtained from 2D-phase-contrast (PC) and 4D-flow in patients scheduled for treatment of carotid artery stenosis. Image acquisition was performed using a 1.5 T scanner. We compared mean flow rates, vessel areas, and peak velocities obtained during the acquisition with both techniques in 20 consecutive patients, 15 males and 5 females aged 69 ± 5 years (mean ± standard deviation). There was a good correlation between both techniques for the CCA flow (r = 0.65, p <0.001), whereas for the ICA flow and ECA flow the correlation was only moderate (r = 0.4, p = 0.011 and r = 0.45, p = 0.003, respectively). Correlations of peak velocities between methods were good for CCA (r = 0.56, p <0.001) and moderate for ECA (r = 0.41, p = 0.008). There was no correlation for ICA (r = 0.04, p = 0.805). Cross-sectional area values between methods showed no significant correlations for CCA (r = 0.18, p = 0.269), ICA (r = 0.1, p = 0.543), and ECA (r = 0.05, p = 0.767). Conclusion: the 4D-flow imaging provided a good correlation of CCA and a moderate correlation of ICA flow rates against 2D-PC, underestimating peak velocities and overestimating cross-sectional areas in all carotid segments.

Carotid phase-contrast magnetic resonance before treatment: 4d-flow versus standard 2d imaging / F. Secchi, C.B. Monti, D. Capra, R. Vitale, D. Mazzaccaro, M. Conti, N. Jin, D. Giese, G. Nano, F. Sardanelli, M. Marrocco-Trischitta. - In: TOMOGRAPHY. - ISSN 2379-139X. - 7:4(2021 Sep 28), pp. 513-522. [10.3390/tomography7040044]

Carotid phase-contrast magnetic resonance before treatment: 4d-flow versus standard 2d imaging

F. Secchi
Primo
;
C.B. Monti
Secondo
;
D. Capra;R. Vitale;G. Nano;F. Sardanelli
Penultimo
;
2021

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement between flow/velocity data obtained from 2D-phase-contrast (PC) and 4D-flow in patients scheduled for treatment of carotid artery stenosis. Image acquisition was performed using a 1.5 T scanner. We compared mean flow rates, vessel areas, and peak velocities obtained during the acquisition with both techniques in 20 consecutive patients, 15 males and 5 females aged 69 ± 5 years (mean ± standard deviation). There was a good correlation between both techniques for the CCA flow (r = 0.65, p <0.001), whereas for the ICA flow and ECA flow the correlation was only moderate (r = 0.4, p = 0.011 and r = 0.45, p = 0.003, respectively). Correlations of peak velocities between methods were good for CCA (r = 0.56, p <0.001) and moderate for ECA (r = 0.41, p = 0.008). There was no correlation for ICA (r = 0.04, p = 0.805). Cross-sectional area values between methods showed no significant correlations for CCA (r = 0.18, p = 0.269), ICA (r = 0.1, p = 0.543), and ECA (r = 0.05, p = 0.767). Conclusion: the 4D-flow imaging provided a good correlation of CCA and a moderate correlation of ICA flow rates against 2D-PC, underestimating peak velocities and overestimating cross-sectional areas in all carotid segments.
Carotid arteries; Carotid stenosis; Endarterectomy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Phase-contrast magnetic resonance; Random-ized controlled trial
Settore MED/36 - Diagnostica per Immagini e Radioterapia
Settore MED/22 - Chirurgia Vascolare
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
tomography-07-00044-v2.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 1.5 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.5 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/877661
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact