4.5 Article

Age, gender, blood pressure, and ventricular geometry influence normal 3D blood flow characteristics in the left heart

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL-CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING
Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages 366-373

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jes196

Keywords

Blood flow; 4D flow MRI; Ageing; Gender; Vortex

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of age, gender, physiological, and global cardiac function parameters on differences in normal 3D blood flow in the left ventricle (LV) and atrium (LA) using 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Four-dimensional flow MRI was acquired in healthy volunteers of two age and gender groups: 30 years (6 women, n 12) and 50 years (6 women, n 12). Systolic and early to mid-diastolic vortex flow (number of vortices, duration, area, peak velocity inside the vortex) in the LA and LV was assessed using intra-cardiac flow visualization based on 3D particle traces and velocity vector fields. A larger number of vortices in the LA were found in young compared with older individuals (number of diastolic vortices: 1.6 0.8 vs. 0.7 0.7, P 0.01) with higher velocities (54 12 cm/s vs. 41 11 cm/s in systole, 47 13 vs. 31 8 cm/s in diastole, P 0.05). Vortices in the LV base were smaller in women compared with men (369 133 vs. 543 176 mm(2), P 0.009), while vortex size was increased in mid-ventricular locations (maximum area: 546 321 vs. 293 174 mm(2), P 0.05). Correlation analysis revealed significant relationships (P 0.0050.048, correlation coefficients 0.440.84) between LA and LV vortex characteristics (number, size, vortex velocities) and blood pressure as well as end-diastolic volume, LV length, and ejection fraction. Flow patterns in the left heart demonstrated differences related to age, gender, blood pressure, and ventricular geometry. The findings constitute a prerequisite for the understanding of the impact of cardiac disease on intra-cardiac haemodynamics.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available