Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with palliated univentricular heart physiology: Measurement using cardiovascular magnetic resonance 4D velocity acquisition

Israel Valverde, Sarah Nordmeyer, Sergio Uribe, Gerald Greil, Felix Berger, Titus Kuehne, Philipp Beerbaum

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

44 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow (SPCF) may constitute a risk factor for increased morbidity and mortality in patients with single-ventricle physiology (SV). However, clinical research is limited by the complexity of multivessel two-dimensional (2D) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) flow measurements. We sought to validate fourdimensional (4D) velocity acquisition sequence for concise quantification of SPCF and flow distribution in patients with SV. Methods: 29 patients with SV physiology prospectively underwent CMR (1.5 T) (n = 14 bidirectional cavopulmonary connection [BCPC], age 2.9 ± 1.3 years; and n = 15 Fontan, 14.4 ± 5.9 years) and 20 healthy volunteers (age, 28.7 ± 13.1 years) served as controls. A single whole-heart 4D velocity acquisition and five 2D flow acquisitions were performed in the aorta, superior/inferior caval veins, right/left pulmonary arteries to serve as gold-standard. The five 2D velocity acquisition measurements were compared with 4D velocity acquisition for validation of individual vessel flow quantification and time efficiency. The SPCF was calculated by evaluating the disparity between systemic (aortic minus caval vein flows) and pulmonary flows (arterial and venour return). The pulmonary right to left and the systemic lower to upper body flow distribution were also calculated. Results: The comparison between 4D velocity and 2D flow acquisitions showed good Bland-Altman agreement for all individual vessels (mean bias, 0.05±0.24 l/min/m2), calculated SPCF (?0.02±0.18 l/min/2) and significantly shorter 4D velocity acquisition-time (12:34 min/17:28 min,p<0.01). 4D velocity acquisition in patients versus controls revealed (1) good agreement between systemic versus pulmonary estimator for SPFC; (2) significant SPCF in patients (BCPC 0.79±0.45 l/min/m2; Fontan 0.62±0.82 l/min/m2) and not in controls (0.01 + 0.16 l/min/m2), (3) inverse relation of right/left pulmonary artery perfusion and right/left SPCF (Pearson = ?0.47,p = 0.01) and (4) upper to lower body flowdistribution trend related to theweight (r = 0.742, p<0.001) similar to the controls. Conclusions:4Dvelocity acquisition is reliable, operator-independent andmore time-efficient than 2Dflowacquisition to quantify SPCF. There is considerable SPCF in BCPC and Fontan patients. SPCF was more pronounced towards the respective lung with less pulmonary arterial flowsuggestingmore collateral flowwhere less anterograde branch pulmonary artery perfusion.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number25
JournalJournal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
Volume14
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 19 2012

Fingerprint

Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Lung
Pulmonary Artery
Venae Cavae
Perfusion
Pulmonary Veins
Gold
Aorta
Veins
Healthy Volunteers
Morbidity
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Family Practice

Cite this

Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with palliated univentricular heart physiology : Measurement using cardiovascular magnetic resonance 4D velocity acquisition. / Valverde, Israel; Nordmeyer, Sarah; Uribe, Sergio; Greil, Gerald; Berger, Felix; Kuehne, Titus; Beerbaum, Philipp.

In: Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Vol. 14, No. 1, 25, 19.06.2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3b7069ef30724257a45b890ca119ff56,
title = "Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with palliated univentricular heart physiology: Measurement using cardiovascular magnetic resonance 4D velocity acquisition",
abstract = "Background: Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow (SPCF) may constitute a risk factor for increased morbidity and mortality in patients with single-ventricle physiology (SV). However, clinical research is limited by the complexity of multivessel two-dimensional (2D) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) flow measurements. We sought to validate fourdimensional (4D) velocity acquisition sequence for concise quantification of SPCF and flow distribution in patients with SV. Methods: 29 patients with SV physiology prospectively underwent CMR (1.5 T) (n = 14 bidirectional cavopulmonary connection [BCPC], age 2.9 ± 1.3 years; and n = 15 Fontan, 14.4 ± 5.9 years) and 20 healthy volunteers (age, 28.7 ± 13.1 years) served as controls. A single whole-heart 4D velocity acquisition and five 2D flow acquisitions were performed in the aorta, superior/inferior caval veins, right/left pulmonary arteries to serve as gold-standard. The five 2D velocity acquisition measurements were compared with 4D velocity acquisition for validation of individual vessel flow quantification and time efficiency. The SPCF was calculated by evaluating the disparity between systemic (aortic minus caval vein flows) and pulmonary flows (arterial and venour return). The pulmonary right to left and the systemic lower to upper body flow distribution were also calculated. Results: The comparison between 4D velocity and 2D flow acquisitions showed good Bland-Altman agreement for all individual vessels (mean bias, 0.05±0.24 l/min/m2), calculated SPCF (?0.02±0.18 l/min/2) and significantly shorter 4D velocity acquisition-time (12:34 min/17:28 min,p<0.01). 4D velocity acquisition in patients versus controls revealed (1) good agreement between systemic versus pulmonary estimator for SPFC; (2) significant SPCF in patients (BCPC 0.79±0.45 l/min/m2; Fontan 0.62±0.82 l/min/m2) and not in controls (0.01 + 0.16 l/min/m2), (3) inverse relation of right/left pulmonary artery perfusion and right/left SPCF (Pearson = ?0.47,p = 0.01) and (4) upper to lower body flowdistribution trend related to theweight (r = 0.742, p<0.001) similar to the controls. Conclusions:4Dvelocity acquisition is reliable, operator-independent andmore time-efficient than 2Dflowacquisition to quantify SPCF. There is considerable SPCF in BCPC and Fontan patients. SPCF was more pronounced towards the respective lung with less pulmonary arterial flowsuggestingmore collateral flowwhere less anterograde branch pulmonary artery perfusion.",
author = "Israel Valverde and Sarah Nordmeyer and Sergio Uribe and Gerald Greil and Felix Berger and Titus Kuehne and Philipp Beerbaum",
year = "2012",
month = "6",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1186/1532-429X-14-25",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
journal = "Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance",
issn = "1097-6647",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with palliated univentricular heart physiology

T2 - Measurement using cardiovascular magnetic resonance 4D velocity acquisition

AU - Valverde, Israel

AU - Nordmeyer, Sarah

AU - Uribe, Sergio

AU - Greil, Gerald

AU - Berger, Felix

AU - Kuehne, Titus

AU - Beerbaum, Philipp

PY - 2012/6/19

Y1 - 2012/6/19

N2 - Background: Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow (SPCF) may constitute a risk factor for increased morbidity and mortality in patients with single-ventricle physiology (SV). However, clinical research is limited by the complexity of multivessel two-dimensional (2D) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) flow measurements. We sought to validate fourdimensional (4D) velocity acquisition sequence for concise quantification of SPCF and flow distribution in patients with SV. Methods: 29 patients with SV physiology prospectively underwent CMR (1.5 T) (n = 14 bidirectional cavopulmonary connection [BCPC], age 2.9 ± 1.3 years; and n = 15 Fontan, 14.4 ± 5.9 years) and 20 healthy volunteers (age, 28.7 ± 13.1 years) served as controls. A single whole-heart 4D velocity acquisition and five 2D flow acquisitions were performed in the aorta, superior/inferior caval veins, right/left pulmonary arteries to serve as gold-standard. The five 2D velocity acquisition measurements were compared with 4D velocity acquisition for validation of individual vessel flow quantification and time efficiency. The SPCF was calculated by evaluating the disparity between systemic (aortic minus caval vein flows) and pulmonary flows (arterial and venour return). The pulmonary right to left and the systemic lower to upper body flow distribution were also calculated. Results: The comparison between 4D velocity and 2D flow acquisitions showed good Bland-Altman agreement for all individual vessels (mean bias, 0.05±0.24 l/min/m2), calculated SPCF (?0.02±0.18 l/min/2) and significantly shorter 4D velocity acquisition-time (12:34 min/17:28 min,p<0.01). 4D velocity acquisition in patients versus controls revealed (1) good agreement between systemic versus pulmonary estimator for SPFC; (2) significant SPCF in patients (BCPC 0.79±0.45 l/min/m2; Fontan 0.62±0.82 l/min/m2) and not in controls (0.01 + 0.16 l/min/m2), (3) inverse relation of right/left pulmonary artery perfusion and right/left SPCF (Pearson = ?0.47,p = 0.01) and (4) upper to lower body flowdistribution trend related to theweight (r = 0.742, p<0.001) similar to the controls. Conclusions:4Dvelocity acquisition is reliable, operator-independent andmore time-efficient than 2Dflowacquisition to quantify SPCF. There is considerable SPCF in BCPC and Fontan patients. SPCF was more pronounced towards the respective lung with less pulmonary arterial flowsuggestingmore collateral flowwhere less anterograde branch pulmonary artery perfusion.

AB - Background: Systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow (SPCF) may constitute a risk factor for increased morbidity and mortality in patients with single-ventricle physiology (SV). However, clinical research is limited by the complexity of multivessel two-dimensional (2D) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) flow measurements. We sought to validate fourdimensional (4D) velocity acquisition sequence for concise quantification of SPCF and flow distribution in patients with SV. Methods: 29 patients with SV physiology prospectively underwent CMR (1.5 T) (n = 14 bidirectional cavopulmonary connection [BCPC], age 2.9 ± 1.3 years; and n = 15 Fontan, 14.4 ± 5.9 years) and 20 healthy volunteers (age, 28.7 ± 13.1 years) served as controls. A single whole-heart 4D velocity acquisition and five 2D flow acquisitions were performed in the aorta, superior/inferior caval veins, right/left pulmonary arteries to serve as gold-standard. The five 2D velocity acquisition measurements were compared with 4D velocity acquisition for validation of individual vessel flow quantification and time efficiency. The SPCF was calculated by evaluating the disparity between systemic (aortic minus caval vein flows) and pulmonary flows (arterial and venour return). The pulmonary right to left and the systemic lower to upper body flow distribution were also calculated. Results: The comparison between 4D velocity and 2D flow acquisitions showed good Bland-Altman agreement for all individual vessels (mean bias, 0.05±0.24 l/min/m2), calculated SPCF (?0.02±0.18 l/min/2) and significantly shorter 4D velocity acquisition-time (12:34 min/17:28 min,p<0.01). 4D velocity acquisition in patients versus controls revealed (1) good agreement between systemic versus pulmonary estimator for SPFC; (2) significant SPCF in patients (BCPC 0.79±0.45 l/min/m2; Fontan 0.62±0.82 l/min/m2) and not in controls (0.01 + 0.16 l/min/m2), (3) inverse relation of right/left pulmonary artery perfusion and right/left SPCF (Pearson = ?0.47,p = 0.01) and (4) upper to lower body flowdistribution trend related to theweight (r = 0.742, p<0.001) similar to the controls. Conclusions:4Dvelocity acquisition is reliable, operator-independent andmore time-efficient than 2Dflowacquisition to quantify SPCF. There is considerable SPCF in BCPC and Fontan patients. SPCF was more pronounced towards the respective lung with less pulmonary arterial flowsuggestingmore collateral flowwhere less anterograde branch pulmonary artery perfusion.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84862161435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84862161435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1532-429X-14-25

DO - 10.1186/1532-429X-14-25

M3 - Article

C2 - 22541134

AN - SCOPUS:84862161435

VL - 14

JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

SN - 1097-6647

IS - 1

M1 - 25

ER -