PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Han, Yichuang AU - Bowen, Daniel J. AU - Barreto, Bernardo Loff AU - Zwaan, Robert. R. AU - Strachinaru, Mihai AU - van der Geest, Rob J. AU - Hirsch, Alexander AU - van den Bosch, Annemien E. AU - Bosch, Johan G. AU - Voorneveld, Jason TI - Validation of Left Ventricular High Frame Rate Echo-Particle Image Velocimetry against 4D Flow MRI in Patients AID - 10.1101/2023.11.27.23298719 DP - 2024 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2023.11.27.23298719 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/16/2023.11.27.23298719.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/16/2023.11.27.23298719.full AB - Aims Accurately measuring intracardiac flow patterns could provide insights into cardiac disease pathophysiology, potentially enhancing diagnostic and prognostic capabilities. This study aims to validate Echo-Particle Image Velocimetry (echoPIV) for in-vivo left ventricular intracardiac flow imaging against 4D flow MRI.Methods and Results We acquired HFR contrast-enhanced ultrasound images from three standard apical views of 26 patients who required cardiac MRI. 4D flow MRI was obtained for each patient. Only echo image planes with sufficient quality and alignment with MRI were included for validation. Regional velocity, kinetic energy and viscous energy loss were compared between modalities using normalized mean absolute error, cosine similarity and Bland-Altman analysis.Among 24 included apical view acquisitions, we observed good correspondence between echoPIV and MRI regarding spatial flow patterns and vortex traces. The velocity profile at base-level (mitral valve) cross-section had cosine similarity of 0.92 ± 0.06 and normalized mean absolute error of 14 ± 5%. Peak spatial mean velocity differed by 3 ± 6 cm/s in systole and 6 ± 10 cm/s in diastole. The kinetic energy and rate of energy loss also revealed a high level of cosine similarity (0.89 ± 0.09 and 0.91 ± 0.06) with normalized mean absolute error of 23 ± 7% and 52 ± 16%.Conclusions Given good B-mode image quality, echoPIV provides a reliable estimation of left ventricular flow, exhibiting spatial-temporal velocity distributions comparable to 4D flow MRI. Both modalities present respective strengths and limitations: echoPIV captured inter-beat variability and had higher temporal resolution, while MRI was more robust to patient BMI and anatomy.Competing Interest StatementA. Hirsch received a research grant and consultancy fees from GE Healthcare and speaker fees from GE Healthcare and Bayer. He is also a member of the medical advisory board of Medis Medical Imaging Systems and was MRI corelab supervisor of Cardialysis BV until 2022.Funding StatementThe work described in this article was funded by the Medical Delta program "Ultrafast Ultrasound for the Heart and Brain"; the project X-Flow of the research program Ultra-X-Treme (P17-32), which is financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO); and the Dutch Heart Foundation (Hartstichting) as part of project number 03-004-2022-0044.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was approved by the Erasmus MC Medical Ethic Review Committee (Rotterdam, the Netherlands), and written informed consent was obtained from all patients (METC-2018-057, NL63755.078.18)I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesData is available on reasonable request