↓ Skip to main content

Whole-heart four-dimensional flow can be acquired with preserved quality without respiratory gating, facilitating clinical use: a head-to-head comparison

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Imaging, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Whole-heart four-dimensional flow can be acquired with preserved quality without respiratory gating, facilitating clinical use: a head-to-head comparison
Published in
BMC Medical Imaging, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12880-015-0061-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikael Kanski, Johannes Töger, Katarina Steding-Ehrenborg, Christos Xanthis, Karin Markenroth Bloch, Einar Heiberg, Marcus Carlsson, Håkan Arheden

Abstract

Respiratory gating is often used in 4D-flow acquisition to reduce motion artifacts. However, gating increases scan time. The aim of this study was to investigate if respiratory gating can be excluded from 4D flow acquisitions without affecting quantitative intracardiac parameters. Eight volunteers underwent CMR at 1.5 T with a 5-channel coil (5ch). Imaging included 2D flow measurements and whole-heart 4D flow with and without respiratory gating (Resp(+), Resp(-)). Stroke volume (SV), particle-trace volumes, kinetic energy, and vortex-ring volume were obtained from 4D flow-data. These parameters were compared between 5ch Resp(+) and 5ch Resp(-). In addition, 20 patients with heart failure were scanned using a 32-channel coil (32ch), and particle-trace volumes were compared to planimetric SV. Paired comparisons were performed using Wilcoxon's test and correlation analysis using Pearson r. Agreement was assessed as bias ± SD. Stroke volume from 4D flow was lower compared to 2D flow both with and without respiratory gating (5ch Resp(+) 88 ± 18 vs 97 ± 24.0, p = 0.001; 5ch Resp(-) 86 ± 16 vs 97.1 ± 22.7, p < 0.01). There was a good correlation between Resp(+) and Resp(-) for particle-trace derived volumes (R(2) = 0.82, 0.2 ± 9.4 ml), mean kinetic energy (R(2) = 0.86, 0.07 ± 0.21 mJ), peak kinetic energy (R(2) = 0.88, 0.14 ± 0.77 mJ), and vortex-ring volume (R(2) = 0.70, -2.5 ± 9.4 ml). Furthermore, good correlation was found between particle-trace volume and planimetric SV in patients for 32ch Resp(-) (R(2) = 0.62, -4.2 ± 17.6 ml) and in healthy volunteers for 5ch Resp(+) (R(2) = 0.89, -11 ± 7 ml), and 5ch Resp(-) (R(2) = 0.93, -7.5 ± 5.4 ml), Average scan duration for Resp(-) was shorter compared to Resp(+) (27 ± 9 min vs 61 ± 19 min, p < 0.05). Whole-heart 4D flow can be acquired with preserved quantitative results without respiratory gating, facilitating clinical use.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Master 4 8%
Lecturer 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 38%
Engineering 9 17%
Physics and Astronomy 3 6%
Unspecified 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 16 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,638,545
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Imaging
#186
of 604 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,023
of 266,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Imaging
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 604 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,666 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.