Premium
Validation and reproducibility of aortic pulse wave velocity as assessed with velocity‐encoded MRI
Author(s) -
Grotenhuis Heynric B.,
Westenberg Jos J.M.,
Steendijk Paul,
van der Geest Rob J.,
Ottenkamp Jaap,
Bax Jeroen J.,
Jukema J. Wouter,
de Roos Albert
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.21886
Subject(s) - pulse wave velocity , reproducibility , intraclass correlation , medicine , magnetic resonance imaging , aorta , nuclear medicine , cardiology , radiology , blood pressure , chemistry , chromatography
Purpose To validate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment of aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV MRI ) with PWV determined from invasive intra‐aortic pressure measurements (PWV INV ) and to test the reproducibility of the measurement by MRI. Materials and Methods PWV MRI was compared with PWV INV in 18 nonconsecutive patients scheduled for catheterization for suspected coronary artery disease. Reproducibility of PWV MRI was tested in 10 healthy volunteers who underwent repeated measurement of PWV MRI at a single occasion. Velocity‐encoded MRI was performed on all participants to assess PWV MRI in the total aorta (Ao total ), the proximal aorta (Ao prox ), and the distal aorta (Ao dist ). Results The results are expressed as mean ± SD, Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC), and intraclass correlation (ICC). Good agreement between PWV MRI and PWV INV was found for Ao total (6.5 ± 1.1 m/s vs. 6.1 ± 0.8 m/s; PCC = 0.53), Ao prox (6.5 ± 1.3 m/s vs. 6.2 ± 1.1 m/s; PCC = 0.69), and for Ao dist (6.9 ± 1.1 m/s vs. 6.1 ± 1.0 m/s; PCC = 0.71). Reproducibility of PWV MRI was high for Ao total (4.3 ± 0.5 m/s vs. 4.6 ± 0.7 m/s; ICC = 0.90, P < 0.01), Ao prox (4.3 ± 0.9 m/s vs. 4.7 ± 1.0 m/s; ICC = 0.87, P < 0.01), and Ao dist (4.3 ± 0.6 m/s vs. 4.4 ± 0.8 m/s; ICC = 0.92, P < 0.01). Conclusion MRI assessment of aortic pulse wave velocity shows good agreement with invasive pressure measurements and can be determined with high reproducibility. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2009;30:521–526. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.