Validation of Doppler measurement of pressure gradients across peripheral model arterial stenosis

Weber, G; Strauss, Andreas L.; Rieger, H.; Scheffler, A; Eisenhoffer, John

doi:10.1016/0741-5214(92)90411-z

Cited by 23 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The correlation found for different grades of stenosis was R = 0.98 (Strauss et al 1990;Weber et al 1992). The correlation found for different grades of stenosis was R = 0.98 (Strauss et al 1990;Weber et al 1992).…”

Section: B-fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasonography in Vascular Diagnosis

Schäberle

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.Product liability: The publishers cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information about dosage and application contained in this book. In every individual case the user must check such information by consulting the relevant literature.Cover design: eStudioCalamar, Fiqueres/Berlin

show abstract

Section: B-fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasonography in Vascular Diagnosis

Schäberle

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While Doppler ultrasound velocity imaging is the present standard for noninvasive pressure estimation, ultrasound methods suffer from limited anatomic access windows and are sensitive to motion in a single direction, parallel to the beam path. These limitations give rise to potential errors in the estimated pressure differences due to insufficient sampling of the blood velocity field (5–8). Phase contrast (PC) MRI, on the other hand, can measure 3D velocity vectors in three spatial dimensions with unrestricted image orientation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fast measurement of intracardiac pressure differences with 2D breath‐hold phase‐contrast MRI

Thompson

McVeigh

2003

Magnetic Resonance in Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intracardiovascular blood pressure differences can be derived from velocity images acquired with phase-contrast (PC) MRI by evaluating the Navier-Stokes equations. Pressure differences within a slice of interest can be calculated using only the inplane velocity components from that slice. This rapid exam is proposed as an alternative to the lengthy 3D velocity imaging exams. Despite their good spatial coverage, the 3D exams are prone to artifacts and errors from respiratory motion and insufficient temporal resolution, and are unattractive in the clinical setting due to their excessive scan times (>10 min of free breathing). The proposed single-slice approach requires only one or two breath-holds of acquisition time, and the velocity data can be processed for the calculation of pressure differences online with immediate feedback. The impact of reducing the pressure difference calculation to two dimensions is quantified by comparison with 3D data sets for the case of blood flow within the cardiac chambers. The calculated pressure differences are validated using high-fidelity pressure transducers both in a pulsatile flow phantom and in vivo in a dog model. There was excellent agreement between the transducer and PC-MRI results in all of the studies.

show abstract

“…Velocity data may be measured using Doppler sonography (2) or MR imaging (3). However, the mean pressure gradient is overestimated by 13% by Doppler ultrasound method, and there is a 10 -150% error for the peak pressure gradient (4). This technique does not take into account the pressure changes produced by the acceleration of the blood, its friction with the wall, or the distensibility of the vessels (5).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%