Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jan 7;3(1):qyaf002.
doi: 10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf002. eCollection 2025 Jan.

Comprehensive 4D-flow cardiac magnetic resonance evaluation of the descending thoracic aorta in aortic regurgitation

Affiliations

Comprehensive 4D-flow cardiac magnetic resonance evaluation of the descending thoracic aorta in aortic regurgitation

J Urmeneta Ulloa et al. Eur Heart J Imaging Methods Pract. .

Abstract

Aims: To assess the reproducibility of 4D-Flow cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) parameters in the descending thoracic aorta-DTAo-(regurgitant fraction [RF], end-diastolic reverse flow [EDRF], and holodiastolic flow reversal [HDR]), and the relationship with RF in the sinotubular junction (STJ), and the left ventricular end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI) in patients with chronic aortic regurgitation (AR).

Methods and results: A descriptive study of these variables was conducted. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the optimal cut-off point. Thirty patients had severe AR (RF ≥ 30%, STJ) and 60 mild-to-moderate (RF < 30%). The mean age was 59 ± 17 years. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 56% (53-61%) and LVEDVI was 94 (76-128) mL/m2. Flow in the DTAo at the left inferior pulmonary vein (LIPV) was easily identifiable and measurements were highly reproducible. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.969 (95% CI: 0.954-0.980) for RF and 0.929 (95% CI: 0.893-0.952) for EDRF. Flow parameters measured at the LIPV were all significantly greater in the severe AR group: RF (21% vs. 6%, P < 0.001), EDRF (20 vs. 4 mL/s; P < 0.001), and HDR (20% vs. 8%; P < 0.001). Three parameters-presence of HDR, RF ≥ 17%, and EDRF ≥ 7 mL/s at the LIPV-were associated with RF ≥ 30% in the STJ and elevated LVEDVI.

Conclusion: 4D-flow CMR can reproducibly assess flow in the DTAo in patients with chronic AR. An RF ≥ 17%, EDRF ≥ 7 mL/s, and/or the presence of HDR in the DTAo (LIPV) were associated with an RF ≥ 30% in STJ and elevated LVEDVI.

Keywords: 4D-flow; aortic regurgitation; cardiac magnetic resonance; descending thoracic aorta; holodiastolic flow reversal.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: None declared.

Figures

Graphical abstract
Graphical abstract
Figure 1
Figure 1
ROC curves. AUC for RF (left) and (EDRF) (right) measured in the DTAo at the LIPV to identify patients with severe AR (RF ≥ 30% at the sinotubular junction).
Figure 2
Figure 2
4D-flow CMR evaluation of the DTAo in patients with AR. (A) Severe AR: Significant regurgitant flow through the aortic valve, with an RF of 35% at the STJ (thin arrow). Qualitative evidence of HDR in the DTAo is observed using streamlines in 3D volumetric reconstruction (thick arrow) and in the derived curve (upper right, HDR compared with baseline). RF is 32%, and EDRF is 29 mL/s at the LIPV. (B) Non-severe AR: Significant regurgitant flow through the aortic valve, with an RF of 30% at the STJ (thin arrow). Qualitative evidence of non-significant flow reversal in the DTAo is observed using streamlines in 3D volumetric reconstruction (thick arrow) and in the derived curve (lower right, without HDR). This is in a patient with AR and complex blood flow patterns (BAV and dilated ascending aorta). RF is 4%, and EDRF is 4 mL/s in the DTAo (LIPV). Abbreviations: Ao, Aorta; AR, aortic regurgitation; DTAo, descending thoracic aorta; EDRF, end-diastolic reverse flow; HDR, holodiastolic flow reversal; IVC, inferior vena cava; LA, left atrium; LIPV, left inferior pulmonary vein; LV, left ventricle; RA, right atrium; RF, regurgitant fraction; STJ, sinotubular junction; SVC, superior vena cava.

References

    1. Siani A, Perone F, Costantini P, Rodolfi S, Muscogiuri G, Sironi S et al. Aortic regurgitation: a multimodality approach. J Clin Ultrasound 2022;50:1041–50. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Popović ZB, Desai MY, Griffin BP. Decision making with imaging in asymptomatic aortic regurgitation. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018;11:1499–513. - PubMed
    1. Ranard LS, Bonow RO, Nishimura R, Mack MJ, Thourani VH, Bavaria J et al. Imaging methods for evaluation of chronic aortic regurgitation in adults. J Am Coll Cardiol 2023;82:1953–66. - PubMed
    1. Cawley PJ, Hamilton-Craig C, Owens DS, Krieger EV, Strugnell WE, Mitsumori L et al. Prospective comparison of valve regurgitation quantitation by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6:48–57. - PubMed
    1. Mor-Avi V, Jenkins C, Kühl HP, Nesser HJ, Marwick T, Franke A et al. Real-Time 3-dimensional echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular volumes. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;1:413–23. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources