Common carotid artery volume flow: A comparison study between ultrasound vector flow imaging and phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Common carotid artery volume flow : A comparison study between ultrasound vector flow imaging and phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging. / Brandt, Andreas Hjelm; Olesen, Jacob Bjerring; Moshavegh, Ramin; Jensen, Jørgen Arendt; Nielsen, Michael Bachmann; Hansen, Kristoffer Lindskov.
In: Neurology International, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2021, p. 269-278.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
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
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
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
U2 - 10.3390/neurolint13030028
DO - 10.3390/neurolint13030028
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 34201493
AN - SCOPUS:85109208616
VL - 13
SP - 269
EP - 278
JO - Neurology International
JF - Neurology International
SN - 2035-8385
IS - 3
ER -
ID: 275014695