Validation of time-resolved, automated peak trans-mitral velocity tracking: Two center four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance study.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to validate four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) peak velocity tracking methods for measuring the peak velocity of mitral inflow against Doppler echocardiography. METHOD: Fifty patients were recruited who had 4D flow CMR and Doppler Echocardiography. After transvalvular flow segmentation using established valve tracking methods, peak velocity was automatically derived using three-dimensional streamlines of transvalvular flow. In addition, a static-planar method was used at the tip of mitral valve to mimic Doppler technique. RESULTS: Peak E-wave mitral inflow velocity was comparable between TTE and the novel 4D flow automated dynamic method (0.9 ± 0.5 vs 0.94 ± 0.6 m/s; p = 0.29) however there was a statistically significant difference when compared with the static planar method (0.85 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.01). Median A-wave peak velocity was also comparable across TTE and the automated dynamic streamline (0.77 ± 0.4 vs 0.76 ± 0.4 m/s; p = 0.77). A significant difference was seen with the static planar method (0.68 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.04). E/A ratio was comparable between TTE and both the automated dynamic and static planar method (1.1 ± 0.7 vs 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.74 and 1.15 ± 0.5 m/s; p = 0.5 respectively). Both novel 4D flow methods showed good correlation with TTE for E-wave (dynamic method; r = 0.70; P < 0.001 and static-planar method; r = 0.67; P < 0.001) and A-wave velocity measurements (dynamic method; r = 0.83; P < 0.001 and static method; r = 0.71; P < 0.001). The automated dynamic method demonstrated excellent intra/inter-observer reproducibility for all parameters. CONCLUSION: Automated dynamic peak velocity tracing method using 4D flow CMR is comparable to Doppler echocardiography for mitral inflow assessment and has excellent reproducibility for clinical use.

Streamline-based three-dimensional peak-velocity tracing of transvalvular flow using four-dimensional flow cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for left ventricular diastolic assessment in aortic regurgitation: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Doppler transthoracic echocardiography is routinely performed to measure peak mitral inflow velocities in the assessment of left ventricular diastolic function. The limitations of echocardiography are well documented, but its accuracy in the measurement of transmitral peak velocity in the presence of aortic valve regurgitation has not yet been compared with four-dimensional flow cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Four-dimensional flow cardiac magnetic resonance imaging offers time-resolved cross-sectional velocity information that can be used to investigate mitral inflow peak velocity. We present a case report demonstrating the potential superior capabilities of four-dimensional flow cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in accurately detecting mitral inflow velocities over Doppler echocardiography in patients with aortic regurgitation. CASE PRESENTATION: A 67-year-old Caucasian female presented to our outpatient cardiology clinic with exertional dyspnea. Doppler transthoracic echocardiography identified moderate to severe aortic regurgitation. Mapping of mitral inflow peak velocities proved challenging with Doppler echocardiography. Additionally, four-dimensional flow cardiac magnetic resonance imaging with automated three-dimensional flow streamlines was performed, which allowed for more accurate detection of mitral inflow peak velocities. CONCLUSIONS: Doppler echocardiography has a limited role in mitral inflow assessment where aortic regurgitation is present. In such cases, four-dimensional flow cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is an alternative imaging technique that may circumvent this issue and allow mitral inflow assessment.

Validation of aortic valve pressure gradient quantification using semi-automated 4D flow CMR pipeline.

OBJECTIVE: Doppler echocardiographic aortic valve peak velocity and peak pressure gradient assessment across the aortic valve (AV) is the mainstay for diagnosing aortic stenosis. Four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) is emerging as a valuable diagnostic tool for estimating the peak pressure drop across the aortic valve, but assessment remains cumbersome. We aimed to validate a novel semi-automated pipeline 4D flow CMR method of assessing peak aortic value pressure gradient (AVPG) using the commercially available software solution, CAAS MR Solutions, against invasive angiographic methods. RESULTS: We enrolled 11 patients with severe AS on echocardiography from the EurValve programme. All patients had pre-intervention doppler echocardiography, invasive cardiac catheterisation with peak pressure drop assessment across the AV and 4D flow CMR. The peak AVPG was 51.9 ± 35.2 mmHg using the invasive pressure drop method and 52.2 ± 29.2 mmHg for the 4D flow CMR method (semi-automated pipeline), with good correlation between the two methods (r = 0.70, p = 0.017). Assessment of AVPG by 4D flow CMR using the novel semi-automated pipeline method shows excellent agreement to invasive assessment when compared to doppler-based methods and advocate for its use as complementary to echocardiography.