Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Four-dimensional flow MRI for evaluation of post-stenotic turbulent flow in a phantom: comparison with flowmeter and computational fluid dynamics

  • Cardiac
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To validate 4D flow MRI in a flow phantom using a flowmeter and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) as reference.

Methods

Validation of 4D flow MRI was performed using flow phantoms with 75 % and 90 % stenosis. The effect of spatial resolution on flow rate, peak velocity and flow patterns was investigated in coronal and axial scans. The accuracy of flow rate with 4D flow MRI was evaluated using a flowmeter as reference, and the peak velocity and flow patterns obtained were compared with CFD analysis results.

Results

4D flow MRI accurately measured the flow rate in proximal and distal regions of the stenosis (percent error ≤3.6 % in axial scanning with 1.6-mm resolution). The peak velocity of 4D flow MRI was underestimated by more than 22.8 %, especially from the second half of the stenosis. With 1-mm isotropic resolution, the maximum thickness of the recirculating flow region was estimated within a 1-mm difference, but the turbulent velocity fluctuations mostly disappeared in the post-stenotic region.

Conclusion

4D flow MRI accurately measures the flow rates in the proximal and distal regions of a stenosis in axial scan but has limitations in its estimation of peak velocity and turbulent characteristics.

Key points

• 4D flow MRI accurately measures the flow rate in axial scan.

• The peak velocity was underestimated by 4D flow MRI.

•4D flow MRI demonstrates the principal pattern of post-stenotic flow.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CFD:

Computational fluid dynamics

PC-MRI:

Phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging

SNR:

Signal-to-noise ratio

References

  1. Hope TA, Markl M, Wigström L, Alley MT, Miller DC, Herfkens RJ (2007) Comparison of flow patterns in ascending aortic aneurysms and volunteers using four‐dimensional magnetic resonance velocity mapping. J Magn Reson Imaging 26:1471–1479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Markl M, Kilner PJ, Ebbers T (2011) Comprehensive 4D velocity mapping of the heart and great vessels by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 13:1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Reiter G, Reiter U, Kovacs G et al (2008) Magnetic resonance–derived 3-dimensional blood flow patterns in the main pulmonary artery as a marker of pulmonary hypertension and a measure of elevated mean pulmonary arterial pressure. Circ: Cardiovasc Imaging 1:23–30

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bächler P, Pinochet N, Sotelo J et al (2013) Assessment of normal flow patterns in the pulmonary circulation by using 4D magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Magn Reson Imaging 31:178–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Geiger J, Hirtler D, Burk J et al (2014) Postoperative pulmonary and aortic 3D haemodynamics in patients after repair of transposition of the great arteries. Eur Radiol 24:200–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Harloff A, Albrecht F, Spreer J et al (2009) 3D blood flow characteristics in the carotid artery bifurcation assessed by flow‐sensitive 4D MRI at 3T. Magn Reson Med 61:65–74

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. van der Hulst AE, Westenberg JJ, Kroft LJ et al (2010) Tetralogy of fallot: 3D velocity-encoded MR imaging for evaluation of right ventricular valve flow and diastolic function in patients after correction 1. Radiology 256:724–734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Markl M, Chan FP, Alley MT et al (2003) Time‐resolved three‐dimensional phase‐contrast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 17:499–506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kilner PJ, Manzara CC, Mohiaddin RH et al (1993) Magnetic resonance jet velocity mapping in mitral and aortic valve stenosis. Circulation 87:1239–1248

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Caruthers SD, Lin SJ, Brown P et al (2003) Practical value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for clinical quantification of aortic valve stenosis comparison with echocardiography. Circulation 108:2236–2243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Khodarahmi I, Shakeri M, Kotys‐Traughber M, Fischer S, Sharp MK, Amini AA (2014) In vitro validation of flow measurement with phase contrast MRI at 3 tesla using stereoscopic particle image velocimetry and stereoscopic particle image velocimetry‐based computational fluid dynamics. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:1477–1485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tang C, Blatter DD, Parker DL (1993) Accuracy of phase‐contrast flow measurements in the presence of partial‐volume effects. J Magn Reson Imaging 3:377–385

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stalder A, Russe M, Frydrychowicz A, Bock J, Hennig J, Markl M (2008) Quantitative 2D and 3D phase contrast MRI: optimized analysis of blood flow and vessel wall parameters. Magn Reson Med 60:1218–1231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sherwin S, Blackburn HM (2005) Three-dimensional instabilities and transition of steady and pulsatile axisymmetric stenotic flows. J Fluid Mech 533:297–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Vreman A (2004) An eddy-viscosity subgrid-scale model for turbulent shear flow: algebraic theory and applications. Phys Fluids (1994-present) 16:3670–3681

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim J, Kim D, Choi H (2001) An immersed-boundary finite-volume method for simulations of flow in complex geometries. J Comput Phys 171:132–150

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ståhlberg F, Søndergaard L, Thomsen C, Henriksen O (1992) Quantification of complex flow using MR phase imaging—a study of parameters influencing the phase/velocity relation. Magn Reson Imaging 10:13–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Elkins CJ, Alley MT (2007) Magnetic resonance velocimetry: applications of magnetic resonance imaging in the measurement of fluid motion. Exp Fluids 43:823–858

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Oshinski JN, Ku DN, Pettigrew RI (1995) Turbulent fluctuation velocity: the most significant determinant of signal loss in stenotic vessels. Magn Reson Med 33:193–199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. O'Brien KR, Cowan BR, Jain M, Stewart RA, Kerr AJ, Young AA (2008) MRI phase contrast velocity and flow errors in turbulent stenotic jets. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:210–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kadbi M, Negahdar M, Traughber M, Martin P, Stoddard MF, Amini AA (2014) 4D UTE flow: a phase‐contrast MRI technique for assessment and visualization of stenotic flows., Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dyverfeldt P, Sigfridsson A, Kvitting JPE, Ebbers T (2006) Quantification of intravoxel velocity standard deviation and turbulence intensity by generalizing phase‐contrast MRI. Magn Reson Med 56:850–858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Binter C, Knobloch V, Manka R, Sigfridsson A, Kozerke S (2013) Bayesian multipoint velocity encoding for concurrent flow and turbulence mapping. Magn Reson Med 69:1337–1345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hope MD, Hope TA, Meadows AK et al (2010) Bicuspid aortic valve: four-dimensional MR evaluation of ascending aortic systolic flow patterns 1. Radiology 255:53–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dyvorne H, Knight-Greenfield A, Jajamovich G et al (2014) Abdominal 4D flow MR imaging in a breath hold: combination of spiral sampling and dynamic compressed sensing for highly accelerated acquisition., Radiology

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Dong Hyun Yang and Young-Hak Kim contributed equally to this article. The scientific guarantor of this publication is Young-Hak Kim. MY Paek, AF Stalder and A Greiser A are employees of Siemens Healthcare. This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (NRF-2013R1A1A1058711) as well as by a grant from the Korea Healthcare Technology R&D Project, the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea (HI12C0630). The study was supported by a grant (2014-7204) from the Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. This study is a phantom study, therefore, institutional review board approval and informed consent were not required. Methodology: experimental, performed at one institution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology and Heart Institute, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea

    Jihoon Kweon & Young-Hak Kim

  2. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, Cardiac Imaging Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asanbyeongwon-gil 86, Seoul, 138-736, South Korea

    Dong Hyun Yang, Guk Bae Kim & Namkug Kim

  3. Siemens Healthcare, Seoul, Korea

    MunYoung Paek

  4. Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany

    Aurelien F. Stalder & Andreas Greiser

Authors
  1. Jihoon Kweon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dong Hyun Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guk Bae Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Namkug Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. MunYoung Paek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Aurelien F. Stalder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andreas Greiser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Young-Hak Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dong Hyun Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kweon, J., Yang, D.H., Kim, G.B. et al. Four-dimensional flow MRI for evaluation of post-stenotic turbulent flow in a phantom: comparison with flowmeter and computational fluid dynamics. Eur Radiol 26, 3588–3597 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-4181-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-4181-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation