Improved aortic pulse wave velocity assessment from multislice two-directional in-plane velocity-encoded magnetic resonance imaging

✍ Scribed by Jos J.M. Westenberg; Albert de Roos; Heynric B. Grotenhuis; Paul Steendijk; Dennis Hendriksen; Pieter J. van den Boogaard; Rob J. van der Geest; Jeroen J. Bax; J. Wouter Jukema; Johan H.C. Reiber

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 2010
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 367 KB
• Volume: 32
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 1053-1807
• DOI: 10.1002/jmri.22359

✦ Synopsis

Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) assessment by in-plane velocity-encoded magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Materials and Methods: In 14 patients selected for cardiac catheterization on suspicion of coronary artery disease and 15 healthy volunteers, PWV was assessed with multislice two-directional in-plane velocity-encoded MRI (PWV i.p. ) and compared with conventionally assessed PWV from multisite one-directional through-plane velocityencoded MRI (PWV t.p. ). In patients, PWV was also obtained from intraarterially acquired pressure-time curves (PWV pressure ), which is considered the gold standard reference method. In volunteers, PWV i.p. and PWV t.p. were obtained in duplicate in the same examination to test reproducibility.

Results:

In patients, PWV i.p. showed stronger correlation and similar variation with PWV pressure than PWV t.p. (Pearson correlation r ¼ 0.75 vs. r ¼ 0.58, and coefficient of variation [COV] ¼ 10% vs. COV ¼ 12%, respectively). In volunteers, repeated PWV i.p. assessment showed stronger correlation and less variation than repeated PWV t.p. (proximal aorta: r ¼ 0.97 and COV ¼ 10% vs. r ¼ 0.69 and COV ¼ 17%; distal aorta: r ¼ 0.94 and COV ¼ 12% vs. r ¼ 0.90 and COV ¼ 16%; total aorta: r ¼ 0.97 and COV ¼ 7% vs. r ¼ 0.90 and COV ¼ 13%).

Conclusion: PWV i.p. is an improvement over conventional PWV t.p. by showing higher agreement as compared to the gold standard (PWV pressure ) and higher reproducibility for repeated MRI assessment.