Does the accuracy of the cardiac flow analysis vary when analysis is done using 2D Cine -3 directional velocity encoded MRI and when it is done using 4D flow MRI with volumetric coverage and 3 directional velocity encoding?
From the perspective of cardiovascular fluid mechanics perhaps yes, but from MRI physics perspective no: assessing velocity or flow data from 2D cine 3-directional velocity encoding is not exactly the same as obtaining velocity information from a static reformatted plane from 4D flow MRI, even when you are able to design both sequences with identical parameters (FOV, TE, TR, bandwidth).
Firstly, 2D imaging is not the same as 3D volume acquisition (2D uses a slice select gradient where 3D imaging uses two phase encode gradients).
Secondly, 3D imaging provides more SNR than 2D imaging and 2D represents velocity data over a relatively thick imaging slice with possible partial volume errors in case of angulated flow.
And third, obviously 4D flow acquisition requires more scan time, which makes the data more vulnerable to errors associated with heart rate variation and patient movement.
More importantly, from a practical point of view, a static 2D plane with cine 3-directional velocity data does not allow a retrospective correction of the imaging plane in the same way as 4D flow MRI data does (for instance for misalignment correction or for retrospective valve tracking).
For 4D flow MRI you can enables flow through any plane across the volume. Using 2D planes with cine in 3-directional you will be limited to these 3 planes
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Mathematics
- Statistics
- Statistical Techniques
- Meta-Analysis