Evaluating the in vivo accuracy of magnetic resonance phase velocity mapping (PVM) is not straightforward because of the absence of a validated clinical flow quantification

Although several methods have been used clinically to assess aortic regurgitation (AR), there is no “gold standard” for regurgitant volume measurement. Magnetic resonance phase velocity mapping (PVM) can be used for noninvasive blood flow measurements. To evaluate the accuracy of PVM in quantifying AR with a single imaging slice in the ascending aorta, in vitro experiments were performed by using a compliant aortic model. Attention was focused on determining the slice location that provided the best results. The most accurate measurements were taken between the aortic valve annulus and the coronary ostia where the measured (Y) and actual (X) flow rate had close agreement (Y = 0.954 × + 0.126, r2 = 0.995, standard deviation of error = 0.139 L/min). Beyond the coronary ostia, coronary flow and aortic compliance negatively affected the accuracy of the measurements. In vivo measurements taken on patients with AR showed the same tendency with the in vitro results. In making decisions regarding patient treatment, diagnostic accuracy is very important. The results from this study suggest that higher accuracy is achieved by placing the slice between the aortic valve and the coronary ostia and that this is the region where attention should be focused for further clinical investigation.

Reliable diagnosis and quantification of mitral regurgitation are important for patient management and for optimizing the time for surgery. Previous methods have often provided suboptimal results. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate MR phase‐velocity mapping in quantifying the mitral regurgitant volume (MRV) using a control volume (CV) method. A number of contiguous slices were acquired with all three velocity components measured. A CV was then selected, encompassing the regurgitant orifice. Mass conservation dictates that the net inflow into the CV should be equal to the regurgitant flow. Results showed that a CV, the boundary voxels of which excluded the region of flow acceleration and aliasing at the orifice, provided accurate measurements of the regurgitant flow. A smaller CV provided erroneous results because of flow acceleration and velocity aliasing close to the orifice. A large CV generally provided inaccurate results because of reduced velocity sensitivity far from the orifice. Aortic outflow, orifice shape, and valve geometry did not affect the accuracy of the CV measurements. The CV method is a promising approach to the problem of quantification of the MRV.

No abstract

M-mode echocardiograms from 40 patients with proven constrictive pericarditis and 40 subjects without evidence of cardiac disease were reviewed for features previously described in constrictive pericarditis. In this large series, no single feature of the M-mode echocardiogram could be considered diagnostic, although a pattern of normal left ventricular size and systolic function, mild left atrial dilation, flattened diastolic left ventricular posterior wall motion and abnormal septal motion was found in most patients. It is concluded that the M-mode echocardiogram can provide findings suggestive of constrictive pericarditis but must be used in conjunction with hemodynamic and other studies to establish the diagnosis.

Although several methods have been used clinically to evaluate the severity of aortic regurgitation, there is no purely quantitative approach for aortic regurgitant volume (ARV) measurements. Magnetic resonance phase velocity mapping can be used to quantify the ARV, with a single imaging slice in the ascending aorta, from through-slice velocity measurements. To investigate the accuracy of this technique, in vitro experiments were performed with a compliant model of the ascending aorta. Our goals were to study the effects of slice location on the reliability of the ARV measurements and to determine the location that provides the most accurate results. It was found that when the slice was placed between the aortic valve and the coronary ostia, the measurements were most accurate. Beyond the coronary ostia, aortic compliance and coronary flow negatively affected the accuracy of the measurements, introducing significant errors. This study shows that slice location is important in quantifying the ARV accurately. The higher accuracy achieved with the slice placed between the aortic valve and the coronary ostia suggests that this slice location should be considered and thoroughly examined as the preferred measurement site clinically.

No abstract

No abstract