In-vitro and In-Vivo Assessment of 4D Flow MRI Reynolds Stress Mapping for Pulsatile Blood Flow

• Published in: Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology Vol. 9; p. 774954
• Main Authors: Ha, Hojin, Huh, Hyung Kyu, Park, Kyung Jin, Dyverfeldt, Petter, Ebbers, Tino, Kim, Dae-Hee, Yang, Dong Hyun
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland Frontiers Media S.A 07-12-2021
• Subjects: Bioengineering and Biotechnology; hemodynamics; magnetic resonace imaging; turbulence measurement; turbulence production; turbulent kinetic energy; turbulence production; turbulence measurement; turbulent kinetic energy; magnetic resonace imaging; hemodynamics
• ISSN: 2296-4185; 2296-4185
• DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2021.774954

Imaging hemodynamics play an important role in the diagnosis of abnormal blood flow due to vascular and valvular diseases as well as in monitoring the recovery of normal blood flow after surgical or interventional treatment. Recently, characterization of turbulent blood flow using 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been demonstrated by utilizing the changes in signal magnitude depending on intravoxel spin distribution. The imaging sequence was extended with a six-directional icosahedral (ICOSA6) flow-encoding to characterize all elements of the Reynolds stress tensor (RST) in turbulent blood flow. In the present study, we aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of full RST analysis using ICOSA6 4D flow MRI under physiological conditions. First, the turbulence analysis was performed through
experiments with a physiological pulsatile flow condition. Second, a total of 12 normal subjects and one patient with severe aortic stenosis were analyzed using the same sequence. The
study showed that total turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) was less affected by the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), however, maximum principal turbulence shear stress (MPTSS) and total turbulence production (TP) had a noise-induced bias. Smaller degree of the bias was observed for TP compared to MPTSS.
study showed that the subject-variability on turbulence quantification was relatively low for the consistent scan protocol. The
demonstration of the stenosis patient showed that the turbulence analysis could clearly distinguish the difference in all turbulence parameters as they were at least an order of magnitude larger than those from the normal subjects.