Quantification of Mitral Valve Regurgitation from 4D Flow MRI Using Semiautomated Flow Tracking

Mitral valve regurgitation assessed by intraventricular CMR 4D-flow: a systematic review on the technological aspects and potential clinical applications

Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) four-dimensional (4D) flow is a novel method for flow quantification potentially helpful in management of mitral valve regurgitation (MVR). In this systematic review, we aimed to depict the clinical role of intraventricular 4D-flow in MVR. The reproducibility, technical aspects, and comparison against conventional techniques were evaluated. Published studies on SCOPUS, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were included using search terms on 4D-flow CMR in MVR. Out of 420 screened articles, 18 studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. All studies (n = 18, 100%) assessed MVR using 4D-flow intraventricular annular inflow (4D-flowAIM) method, which calculates the regurgitation by subtracting the aortic forward flow from the mitral forward flow. Thereof, 4D-flow jet quantification (4D-flowjet) was assessed in 5 (28%), standard 2D phase-contrast (2D-PC) flow imaging in 8 (44%) and the volumetric method (the deviation of left ventricle stroke volume and right ventricular stroke volume) in 2 (11%) studies. Inter-method correlations among the 4 MVR quantification methods were heterogeneous across studies, ranging from moderate to excellent correlations. Two studies compared 4D-flowAIM to echocardiography with moderate correlation. In 12 (63%) studies the reproducibility of 4D-flow techniques in quantifying MVR was studied. Thereof, 9 (75%) studies investigated the reproducibility of the 4D-flowAIM method and the majority (n = 7, 78%) reported good to excellent intra- and inter-reader reproducibility. Intraventricular 4D-flowAIM provides high reproducibility with heterogeneous correlations to conventional quantification methods. Due to the absence of a gold standard and unknown accuracies, future longitudinal outcome studies are needed to assess the clinical value of 4D-flow in the clinical setting of MVR.

4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement: 2023 update

Hemodynamic assessment is an integral part of the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease. Four-dimensional cardiovascular magnetic resonance flow imaging (4D Flow CMR) allows comprehensive and accurate assessment of flow in a single acquisition. This consensus paper is an update from the 2015 '4D Flow CMR Consensus Statement'. We elaborate on 4D Flow CMR sequence options and imaging considerations. The document aims to assist centers starting out with 4D Flow CMR of the heart and great vessels with advice on acquisition parameters, post-processing workflows and integration into clinical practice. Furthermore, we define minimum quality assurance and validation standards for clinical centers. We also address the challenges faced in quality assurance and validation in the research setting. We also include a checklist for recommended publication standards, specifically for 4D Flow CMR. Finally, we discuss the current limitations and the future of 4D Flow CMR. This updated consensus paper will further facilitate widespread adoption of 4D Flow CMR in the clinical workflow across the globe and aid consistently high-quality publication standards.

The Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Patients with Mitral Regurgitation

The 2019 Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study estimated that there were approximately 24.2 million people affected worldwide by degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR), resulting in 34,200 deaths. After aortic stenosis, MR is the most prevalent VHD in Europe and the second-most common VHD to pose indications for surgery in western countries. Current ESC and AHA/ACC guidelines for the management of VHD emphasize the importance of an integrative approach for the assessment of MR severity, which is of paramount importance in dictating the timing for surgery. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) are the first-line imaging modalities; however, despite the technological advancement, sometimes, the final diagnosis on the degree of the disease may still be challenging. In the last 20 years, CMR has emerged as a robust technique in the assessment of patients with cardiac disease, and, recently, its role is gaining more and more importance in the field of VHD. In fact, CMR is the gold standard in the assessment of cardiac volumes, and it is possible to accurately evaluate the regurgitant volume. The purpose of this review is to outline the current state-of-the-art management of MR by using Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR).

Rationale and clinical applications of 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance in assessment of valvular heart disease: a comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Accurate evaluation of valvular pathology is crucial in the timing of surgical intervention. Whilst transthoracic echocardiography is widely available and routinely used in the assessment of valvular heart disease, it is bound by several limitations. Although cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging can overcome many of the challenges encountered by echocardiography, it also has a number of limitations.

MAIN TEXT

4D Flow CMR is a novel technique, which allows time-resolved, 3-dimensional imaging. It enables visualisation and direct quantification of flow and peak velocities of all valves simultaneously in one simple acquisition, without any geometric assumptions. It also has the unique ability to measure advanced haemodynamic parameters such as turbulent kinetic energy, viscous energy loss rate and wall shear stress, which may add further diagnostic and prognostic information. Although 4D Flow CMR acquisition can take 5-10 min, emerging acceleration techniques can significantly reduce scan times, making 4D Flow CMR applicable in contemporary clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

4D Flow CMR is an emerging CMR technique, which has the potential to become the new reference-standard method for the evaluation of valvular lesions. In this review, we describe the clinical applications, advantages and disadvantages of 4D Flow CMR in the assessment of valvular heart disease.

Role of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Native Valvular Regurgitation: A Comprehensive Review of Protocols, Grading of Severity, and Prediction of Valve Surgery

Valvular regurgitation is common in developed countries with an increasing prevalence due to the aging of the population and more accurate diagnostic imaging methods. Echocardiography is the gold standard method for the assessment of the severity of valvular heart regurgitation. Nonetheless, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as an additional tool for assessing mainly the severity of aortic and mitral valve regurgitation in the setting of indeterminate findings by echocardiography. Moreover, CMR is a valuable imaging modality to assess ventricular volume and flow, which are useful in the calculation of regurgitant volume and regurgitant fraction of mitral valve regurgitation, aortic valve regurgitation, tricuspid valve regurgitation, and pulmonary valve regurgitation. Notwithstanding this, reference values and optimal thresholds to determine the severity and prognosis of valvular heart regurgitation have been studied lesser by CMR than by echocardiography. Hence, further larger studies are warranted to validate the potential prognostic relevance of the severity of valvular heart regurgitation determined by CMR. The present review describes, analyzes, and discusses the use of CMR to determine the severity of valvular heart regurgitation in clinical practice.

Valvular regurgitation flow jet assessment using in vitro 4D flow MRI: Implication for mitral regurgitation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of four-dimensional (4D) flow MRI for direct assessment of peak velocity, flow volume, and momentum of a mitral regurgitation (MR) flow jets using an in vitro pulsatile jet flow phantom. We systematically investigated the impact of spatial resolution and quantification location along the jet on flow quantities with Doppler ultrasound as a reference for peak velocity.

METHODS

Four-dimensional flow MRI data of a pulsatile jet through a circular, elliptical, and 3D-printed patient-specific MR orifice model was acquired with varying spatial resolution (1.5-5 mm isotropic voxel). Flow rate and momentum of the jet were quantified at various axial distances (x = 0-50 mm) and integrated over time to calculate Vol_jet and MTI_jet . In vivo assessment of Vol_jet and MTI_jet was performed on 3 MR patients.

RESULTS

Peak velocities were comparable to Doppler ultrasound (3% error, 1.5 mm voxel), but underestimated with decreasing spatial resolution (-40% error, 5 mm voxel). Vol_jet was similar to regurgitant volume (RVol) within 5 mm, and then increased linearly with the axial distance (19%/cm) because of flow entrainment. MTI_jet remained steady throughout the jet (2%/cm) as theoretically predicted. Four and 9 voxels across the jet were required to measure flow volume and momentum-time-integral within 10% error, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Four-dimensional flow MRI detected accurate peak velocity, flow rate, and momentum for in vitro MR-mimicking flow jets. Spatial resolution significantly impacted flow quantitation, which otherwise followed predictions of flow entrainment and momentum conservation. This study provides important preliminary information for accurate in vivo MR assessment using 4D flow MRI.

Whole-Heart 4D Flow MRI for Evaluation of Normal and Regurgitant Valvular Flow: A Quantitative Comparison Between Pseudo-Spiral Sampling and EPI Readout

Background

Pseudo‐spiral Cartesian sampling with compressed sensing reconstruction has facilitated highly accelerated 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in various cardiovascular structures. However, unlike echo planar imaging (EPI)‐accelerated 4D flow MRI, it has not been validated in whole‐heart applications.

Hypothesis

Pseudo‐spiral 4D flow MRI (PROUD [PROspective Undersampling in multiple Dimensions]) is comparable to EPI in robustness of valvular flow measurements and remains comparable as the undersampling factor is increased and scan time reduced.

Study Type

Prospective.

Population

Twelve healthy subjects and eight patients with valvular regurgitation.

Field Strength/Sequence

3.0 T; PROUD and EPI 4D flow sequences, 2D flow and balanced steady‐state free precession sequences.

Assessment

Valvular blood flow was quantified using valve tracking. PROUD‐ and EPI‐based measurements of aortic (AV) and pulmonary (PV) flow volumes and left and right ventricular stroke volumes were tested for agreement with 2D MRI‐based measurements. PROUD reconstructions with undersampling factors (R) of 9, 14, 28, and 56 were tested for intervalve consistency (per valve, compared to the other valves) and preservation of peak velocities and E/A ratios.

Statistical Tests

We used repeated measures ANOVA, Bland‐Altman, Wilcoxon signed rank, and intraclass correlation coefficients. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

PROUD and EPI intervalve consistencies were not significantly different both in healthy subjects (valve‐averaged mean difference [limits of agreement width]: 3.2 ± 0.8 [8.7 ± 1.1] mL/beat for PROUD, 5.5 ± 2.9 [13.7 ± 2.3] mL/beat for EPI, P = 0.07) and in patients with valvular regurgitation (2.3 ± 1.2 [15.3 ± 5.9] mL/beat for PROUD, 0.6 ± 0.6 [19.3 ± 2.9] mL/beat for EPI, P = 0.47). Agreement between EPI and PROUD was higher than between 4D flow (EPI or PROUD) and 2D MRI for forward flow, stroke volumes, and regurgitant volumes. Up to R = 28 in healthy subjects and R = 14 in patients with valvular regurgitation, PROUD intervalve consistency remained comparable to that of EPI. Peak velocities and E/A ratios were preserved up to R = 9.

Conclusion

PROUD is comparable to EPI in terms of intervalve consistency and may be used with higher undersampling factors to shorten scan times further.

Level of Evidence

1

Technical Efficacy Stage

2

Clinical intra-cardiac 4D flow CMR: acquisition, analysis, and clinical applications

Identification of flow patterns within the heart has long been recognized as a potential contribution to the understanding of physiological and pathophysiological processes of cardiovascular diseases. Although the pulsatile flow itself is multi-dimensional and multi-directional, current available non-invasive imaging modalities in clinical practice provide calculation of flow in only 1-direction and lack 3-dimensional volumetric velocity information. Four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow CMR) has emerged as a novel tool that enables comprehensive and critical assessment of flow through encoding velocity in all 3 directions in a volume of interest resolved over time. Following technical developments, 4D flow CMR is not only capable of visualization and quantification of conventional flow parameters such as mean/peak velocity and stroke volume but also provides new hemodynamic parameters such as kinetic energy. As a result, 4D flow CMR is being extensively exploited in clinical research aiming to improve understanding of the impact of cardiovascular disease on flow and vice versa. Of note, the analysis of 4D flow data is still complex and accurate analysis tools that deliver comparable quantification of 4D flow values are a necessity for a more widespread adoption in clinic. In this article, the acquisition and analysis processes are summarized and clinical applications of 4D flow CMR on the heart including conventional and novel hemodynamic parameters are discussed. Finally, clinical potential of other emerging intra-cardiac 4D flow imaging modalities is explored and a near-future perspective on 4D flow CMR is provided.

Retrospective Camera-Based Respiratory Gating in Clinical Whole-Heart 4D Flow MRI

Background

Respiratory gating is generally recommended in 4D flow MRI of the heart to avoid blurring and motion artifacts. Recently, a novel automated contact‐less camera‐based respiratory motion sensor has been introduced.

Purpose

To compare camera‐based respiratory gating (CAM) with liver‐lung‐navigator‐based gating (NAV) and no gating (NO) for whole‐heart 4D flow MRI.

Study Type

Retrospective.

Subjects

Thirty two patients with a spectrum of cardiovascular diseases.

Field Strength/Sequence

A 3T, 3D‐cine spoiled‐gradient‐echo‐T1‐weighted‐sequence with flow‐encoding in three spatial directions.

Assessment

Respiratory phases were derived and compared against each other by cross‐correlation. Three radiologists/cardiologist scored images reconstructed with camera‐based, navigator‐based, and no respiratory gating with a 4‐point Likert scale (qualitative analysis). Quantitative image quality analysis, in form of signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) and liver‐lung‐edge (LLE) for sharpness and quantitative flow analysis of the valves were performed semi‐automatically.

Statistical Tests

One‐way repeated measured analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Wilks's lambda testing and follow‐up pairwise comparisons. Significance level of P ≤ 0.05. Krippendorff's‐alpha‐test for inter‐rater reliability.

Results

The respiratory signal analysis revealed that CAM and NAV phases were highly correlated (C = 0.93 ± 0.09, P < 0.01). Image scoring showed poor inter‐rater reliability and no significant differences were observed (P ≥ 0.16). The image quality comparison showed that NAV and CAM were superior to NO with higher SNR (P = 0.02) and smaller LLE (P < 0.01). The quantitative flow analysis showed significant differences between the three respiratory‐gated reconstructions in the tricuspid and pulmonary valves (P ≤ 0.05), but not in the mitral and aortic valves (P > 0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed that reconstructions without respiratory gating were different in flow measurements to either CAM or NAV or both, but no differences were found between CAM and NAV reconstructions.

Data Conclusion

Camera‐based respiratory gating performed as well as conventional liver‐lung‐navigator‐based respiratory gating. Quantitative image quality analysis showed that both techniques were equivalent and superior to no‐gating‐reconstructions. Quantitative flow analysis revealed local flow differences (tricuspid/pulmonary valves) in images of no‐gating‐reconstructions, but no differences were found between images reconstructed with camera‐based and navigator‐based respiratory gating.

Level of Evidence

3

Technical Efficacy

Stage 2