English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

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 multi-site two-dimensional (2D) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) flow assessment. We sought to validate four-dimensional flow (4D-flow) for concise quantification of SPCF in patients with SV. Methods 29 patients with SV physiology prospectively underwent CMR (1.5T) to quantify SPCF (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. Five 2D-flow measurements (ascending aorta, superior/inferior caval veins, right/left pulmonary arteries) were performed and SPCF (=aortic minus caval flows) was calculated and compared with 4D-flow measurements and calculations. Additionally, 4D-flow measurements were used to calculate SPCF as pulmonary venous minus pulmonary arterial flow. Results The comparison between 4D-flow and 2D-flow 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/m2), low intra and inter-observer variance (ICC>0.95[0.91-0.97]) and significantly shorter 4D-flow acquisition-time (12:34min/17:28min,p<0.01). 4D-flow 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) and (3) inverse relation of right/ left pulmonary artery perfusion and right/left SPCF (Pearson=-0.47,p=0.01). Conclusions

journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance

Flow-sensitive four-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging facilitates the quantitative analysis of systemic-to-pulmonary collateral flow in patients with univentricular hearts