↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of mitral regurgitation by 3-dimensional proximal flow convergence using magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with echo-Doppler

Overview of attention for article published in The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of mitral regurgitation by 3-dimensional proximal flow convergence using magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with echo-Doppler
Published in
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10554-017-1290-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lior Gorodisky, Yoram Agmon, Moshe Porat, Sobhi Abadi, Jonathan Lessick

Abstract

To test the feasibility of assessing mitral regurgitation (MR) severity using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) 4D velocity vectors to quantify regurgitant volume (RVol) by analysis of the proximal flow convergence, compared to Doppler based proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) and CMR volume-based methods. In a prospectively designed study, 27 patients with various grades of MR underwent CMR and echo-Doppler on the same day. By CMR, multiple slices were obtained parallel to the mitral valve by phase-contrast imaging, using 3D velocity vectors, as well as short-axis cine images for left and right ventricular volume measurements. Using dedicated software developed in our laboratory, the perimeter of the proximal flow convergence region was semi-automatically measured for each temporal phase, and for each short-axis slice. The CMR-PISA RVol was calculated as the sum of PISA perimeters throughout systole, multiplied by slice width. For comparison, CMR-volumetric RVol was calculated by 2 methods: Volumetric (difference between left and right ventricular stroke volumes) and Flow-based (stroke volume -aortic flow). Echo-PISA RVol was calculated by echo-Doppler based PISA method. RVol by CMR-PISA correlated highly with echo-PISA (r = 0.87) and with CMR-volumetric (r = 0.86) and CMR-flow (r = 0.72). For comparison Doppler-RVol and CMR-volume-based RVol had r = 0.83. On average CMR-PISA was 16 ± 25 ml less than echo-PISA, but 12 ± 22 ml larger than CMR-volumetric RVol. The observed 3D shape of the PISA envelope by 4D-CMR resembled a hemiellipsoid rather than a hemisphere. This feasibility study suggests that CMR-based 4D-PISA may be able to assess MR severity quantitatively without any geometric assumptions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 24%
Student > Master 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Professor 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 41%
Engineering 4 11%
Sports and Recreations 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 December 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#1,116
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#323,100
of 447,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#20
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,047 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.