Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement : 2023 update

Bissell, Malenka M. ; Raimondi, Francesca ; Ait Ali, Lamia ; Allen, Bradley D. ; Barker, Alex J. ; Bolger, Ann ; Burris, Nicholas ; Carhäll, Carl Johan ; Collins, Jeremy D. and Ebbers, Tino , et al. (2023) In Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance 25(1).
Abstract

Hemodynamic assessment is an integral part of the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease. Four-dimensional cardiovascular magnetic resonance flow imaging (4D Flow CMR) allows comprehensive and accurate assessment of flow in a single acquisition. This consensus paper is an update from the 2015 ‘4D Flow CMR Consensus Statement’. We elaborate on 4D Flow CMR sequence options and imaging considerations. The document aims to assist centers starting out with 4D Flow CMR of the heart and great vessels with advice on acquisition parameters, post-processing workflows and integration into clinical practice. Furthermore, we define minimum quality assurance and validation standards for clinical centers. We also address the challenges... (More)

Hemodynamic assessment is an integral part of the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease. Four-dimensional cardiovascular magnetic resonance flow imaging (4D Flow CMR) allows comprehensive and accurate assessment of flow in a single acquisition. This consensus paper is an update from the 2015 ‘4D Flow CMR Consensus Statement’. We elaborate on 4D Flow CMR sequence options and imaging considerations. The document aims to assist centers starting out with 4D Flow CMR of the heart and great vessels with advice on acquisition parameters, post-processing workflows and integration into clinical practice. Furthermore, we define minimum quality assurance and validation standards for clinical centers. We also address the challenges faced in quality assurance and validation in the research setting. We also include a checklist for recommended publication standards, specifically for 4D Flow CMR. Finally, we discuss the current limitations and the future of 4D Flow CMR. This updated consensus paper will further facilitate widespread adoption of 4D Flow CMR in the clinical workflow across the globe and aid consistently high-quality publication standards.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and , et al. (More)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and (Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
4D Flow CMR, 4D Flow MRI, Cardiovascular, Clinical, Flow quantification, Flow visualization, Heart disease, Hemodynamics, MR flow imaging, Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging, Recommendations
in
Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
volume
25
issue
1
article number
40
publisher
BioMed Central (BMC)
external identifiers
  • pmid:37474977
  • scopus:85165344456
ISSN
1097-6647
DOI
10.1186/s12968-023-00942-z
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
095731f9-c9fc-4c87-b95c-260f8788e151
date added to LUP
2023-08-24 15:06:49
date last changed
2024-04-20 02:39:56
@article{095731f9-c9fc-4c87-b95c-260f8788e151,
  abstract     = {{<p>Hemodynamic assessment is an integral part of the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease. Four-dimensional cardiovascular magnetic resonance flow imaging (4D Flow CMR) allows comprehensive and accurate assessment of flow in a single acquisition. This consensus paper is an update from the 2015 ‘4D Flow CMR Consensus Statement’. We elaborate on 4D Flow CMR sequence options and imaging considerations. The document aims to assist centers starting out with 4D Flow CMR of the heart and great vessels with advice on acquisition parameters, post-processing workflows and integration into clinical practice. Furthermore, we define minimum quality assurance and validation standards for clinical centers. We also address the challenges faced in quality assurance and validation in the research setting. We also include a checklist for recommended publication standards, specifically for 4D Flow CMR. Finally, we discuss the current limitations and the future of 4D Flow CMR. This updated consensus paper will further facilitate widespread adoption of 4D Flow CMR in the clinical workflow across the globe and aid consistently high-quality publication standards.</p>}},
  author       = {{Bissell, Malenka M. and Raimondi, Francesca and Ait Ali, Lamia and Allen, Bradley D. and Barker, Alex J. and Bolger, Ann and Burris, Nicholas and Carhäll, Carl Johan and Collins, Jeremy D. and Ebbers, Tino and Francois, Christopher J. and Frydrychowicz, Alex and Garg, Pankaj and Geiger, Julia and Ha, Hojin and Hennemuth, Anja and Hope, Michael D. and Hsiao, Albert and Johnson, Kevin and Kozerke, Sebastian and Ma, Liliana E. and Markl, Michael and Martins, Duarte and Messina, Marci and Oechtering, Thekla H. and van Ooij, Pim and Rigsby, Cynthia and Rodriguez-Palomares, Jose and Roest, Arno A.W. and Roldán-Alzate, Alejandro and Schnell, Susanne and Sotelo, Julio and Stuber, Matthias and Syed, Ali B. and Töger, Johannes and van der Geest, Rob and Westenberg, Jos and Zhong, Liang and Zhong, Yumin and Wieben, Oliver and Dyverfeldt, Petter}},
  issn         = {{1097-6647}},
  keywords     = {{4D Flow CMR; 4D Flow MRI; Cardiovascular; Clinical; Flow quantification; Flow visualization; Heart disease; Hemodynamics; MR flow imaging; Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging; Recommendations}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{1}},
  publisher    = {{BioMed Central (BMC)}},
  series       = {{Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance}},
  title        = {{4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement : 2023 update}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12968-023-00942-z}},
  doi          = {{10.1186/s12968-023-00942-z}},
  volume       = {{25}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}