Comparative Study
Evaluation Studies
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Studies
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Left and right ventricular kinetic energy using time-resolved versus time-average ventricular volumes.

PURPOSE: To measure the effects of using time-resolved (TR) versus time-averaged (TA) ventricular segmentation on four-dimensional flow-sensitive (4D flow) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) kinetic energy (KE) calculations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Right (RV) and left (LV) ventricular KE was calculated from 4D flow MRI data acquired at 3.0T in 10 healthy volunteers and five subjects with cardiac disease using TR and TA segmentation. KE was calculated from the mass of blood within the ventricles multiplied by the velocities squared. Differences in TR and TA KE and interobserver variability were quantified with Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS: In healthy volunteers, peak systolic RV KE (KERV ) were 4.89 ± 1.49 mJ using TR and 5.53 ± 1.62 mJ using TA segmentation (P = 0.016); peak systolic LV KE (KELV ) were 3.29 ± 0.96 mJ and 4.16 ± 1.26 mJ (P = 0.005). Peak diastolic KERV were 3.33 ± 0.90 mJ (TR) and 3.61 ± 1.12 mJ (TA) (P = 0.082), while peak diastolic KELV were 4.90 ± 1.49 mJ and 5.31 ± 1.59 mJ (P = 0.044). In patient volunteers, peak systolic KERV were 4.34 ± 3.78 mJ using TR and 4.88 ± 3.98 mJ using TA segmentation (P = 0.26); peak systolic KELV were 4.39 ± 4.21 mJ and 4.36 ± 3.84 mJ (P = 0.91). Peak diastolic KERV were 3.34 ± 2.08 mJ (TR) and 4.05 ± 1.12 mJ (TA) (P = 0.08), while peak diastolic KELV were 4.34 ± 5.11 mJ and 4.06 ± 3.47 mJ (P = 0.75). Interobserver differences in KELV were greater for TR than TA calculations; bias ranged from 3 ± 30% for TA peak systolic KELV to 36 ± 30% for TR peak diastolic KELV .

CONCLUSION: Although qualitatively similar, KE values calculated through TA segmentation were consistently greater than TR KE, with differences more pronounced during systole and in the LV.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;45:821-828.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app