% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Mller:294685,
      author       = {M. Müller and E. Daud and G. Langer and J. Gröschel and
                      D. Viezzer and T. Hadler and N. Jin and D. Giese and S.
                      Schmitter$^*$ and J. Schulz-Menger and R. F. Trauzeddel},
      title        = {{I}nter-site comparability of 4{D} flow cardiovascular
                      magnetic resonance measurements in healthy traveling
                      volunteers-a multi-site and multi-magnetic field strength
                      study.},
      journal      = {Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine},
      volume       = {11},
      issn         = {2297-055X},
      address      = {Lausanne},
      publisher    = {Frontiers Media},
      reportid     = {DKFZ-2024-02420},
      pages        = {1456814},
      year         = {2024},
      abstract     = {Time-resolved 3D cine phase-contrast cardiovascular
                      magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) enables the
                      characterization of blood flow using basic and advanced
                      hemodynamic parameters. However, different confounders,
                      e.g., different field strength, scanner configurations, or
                      sequences, might impact 4D flow CMR measurements. This study
                      aimed to analyze the inter-site reproducibility of 4D flow
                      CMR to determine the influence of said confounders.A cohort
                      of 19 healthy traveling volunteers underwent 4D flow CMR at
                      four different sites (Sites I-III: 3 T scanner; Site IV: 1.5
                      T scanner; all Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany). Two
                      protocols of one 4D flow CMR research sequence were
                      performed, one acquiring velocity vector fields in the
                      thoracic aorta only and one in the entire heart and thoracic
                      aorta combined. Basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters,
                      i.e., forward flow volume (FFV), peak and mean velocities
                      (Vp and Vm), and wall shear stress (3D WSS), at nine
                      different planes across the thoracic aorta (P1-P2 ascending
                      aorta, P3-P5 aortic arch, P6-P9 descending aorta) were
                      analyzed. Based on a second scan at Site I, mean values and
                      tolerance ranges (TOL) were generated for inter-site
                      comparison. Equivalency was assumed when confidence
                      intervals of Sites II-IV lay within such TOL. Additionally,
                      inter- and intra-observer analysis as well as a comparison
                      between the two protocols was performed, using an intraclass
                      correlation coefficient (ICC).Inter-site comparability
                      showed equivalency in P1 and P2 for FFV, Vp, and Vm at all
                      sites. Non-equivalency was present in various planes of
                      P3-P9 and in P2 for 3D WSS in one protocol. In total, Site
                      IV showed the most disagreements. Protocol comparison
                      yielded excellent (>0.9) ICC in every plane for FFV, good
                      (0.75-0.9) to excellent ICC for Vm and 3D WSS, good to
                      excellent ICC in eight planes for Vp, and moderate
                      (0.5-0.75) ICC in one plane for Vp. Inter- and
                      intra-observer analysis showed excellent agreement for every
                      parameter.Basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters revealed
                      equivalency at different sites and field strength in the
                      ascending aorta, a clinically important region of interest,
                      under a highly controlled environment.},
      keywords     = {4D flow CMR (Other) / healthy volunteers (Other) / quality
                      assurance (Other) / standardization (Other) / thoracic aorta
                      (Other)},
      cin          = {E020},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-He78)E020-20160331},
      pnm          = {315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:39582524},
      pmc          = {pmc:PMC11582008},
      doi          = {10.3389/fcvm.2024.1456814},
      url          = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/294685},
}