Abstract:Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Echo-Particle Image Velocimetry (echoPIV) tracks speckle patterns from ultrasound contrast agent (UCA) microbubbles injected intravenously, being less angle-sensitive than colour Doppler. One limitation of conventional echoPIV is the inability to accurately resolve high velocities, because of relatively low frame rates. In contrast, high frame rate (HFR) echoPIV enables tracking of fast flow in the left ventricle (LV). Purpose To investigate the feasibility and precision of HFR echoPIV in patients. Methods 19 heart failure patients were included. UCA was infused with a dedicated pump. HFR contrast images were acquired, in apical long axis view (ALAX, ensuring simultaneous visualization of LV inflow and outflow), using a fully-programmable research ultrasound system, with a phased array probe. In the same session, complete echocardiographic studies were obtained using a clinical ultrasound system, with a matrix array probe, including LV UCA. Non-contrast pulsed-wave (PW) Doppler were also obtained in ALAX (Figure 1) from the mitral valve tips (inflow) and the LV outflow tract (outflow). HFR echoPIV image quality and tracking were assessed offline by two independent observers. The peak velocity of the inflow and outflow were determined by the automated tracking algorithm of the HFR echoPIV, and measured by the peak modal velocity of the conventional PW. These velocities were compared using Pearson’s correlations and Bland-Altman plots. All patients gave their informed consent. The study was approved by the institutional review board. Results Conventional echo image quality was good in 12 (63%), medium in 5 (26%) and bad in 2 (11%). EchoPIV tracking was good in 12 (63%), medium in 2 (10%) and bad in 5 (26%). In the 12 patients where echoPIV tracking was good, the direction and velocity of intracavitary vortices could be visualized (Figure 1). The inflow velocity could be determined by echoPIV in 17/19 (89%), and outflow in 14/19 (74%). EchoPIV tended to underestimate the maximal velocity as determined by PW (Figure 2), with a bias of 0.19 m/s (inflow) and 0.28 m/s (outflow). This negative bias is expected as the PW is assessing maximum velocity in the interrogation kernel whereas echoPIV returns the mean velocity. The correlation of the two methods was good for the inflow (R2 = 0.77, p < 0.001) and moderate for the outflow (R2 = 0.54, p < 0.001). This may be explained by the position of the LV outflow tract deeper in the image, leading to increased attenuation, clutter and reduced lateral resolution. Conclusion HFR echoPIV has comparable feasibility to routine echocardiography, and the ability to correctly estimate intraventricular flow velocity. It can provide in one acquisition all the functional information that can be detected by routine echocardiography, PW and color Doppler, as well as contrast. It succeeds in surpassing the shortcomings of Doppler (angle dependency) and classical contrast imaging (low frame rate). Abstract Figure 1: HFR echoPIV in study patients Abstract Figure 2: study results

High-Frame-Rate Ultrasound Velocimetry in the Healthy Femoral Bifurcation: A Comparative Study Against 4-D Flow Magnetic Resonance Imaging

US Velocimetry in Participants with Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease

Ultrasound Imaging Velocimetry with Interleaved Images for Improved Pulsatile Arterial Flow Measurements: a New Correction Method, Experimental and in Vivo Validation

High-Frame Rate Vector Flow Imaging of the Carotid Bifurcation in Healthy Adults: Comparison With Color Doppler Imaging

Velocity vector comparison between vector flow imaging and computational fluid dynamics in the carotid bifurcation

First experiences of ultrasound vector flow imaging at the femoropopliteal artery in peripheral arterial disease

Quantitative Blood Flow Measurements in the Common Carotid Artery: A Comparative Study of High-Frame-Rate Ultrasound Vector Flow Imaging, Pulsed Wave Doppler, and Phase Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Coronary Flow Assessment Using Accelerated 4D Flow MRI With Respiratory Motion Correction

Combined free-running four-dimensional anatomical and flow magnetic resonance imaging with native contrast using Synchronization of Neighboring Acquisitions by Physiological Signals

Automated Quantification of Simple and Complex Aortic Flow Using 2D Phase Contrast MRI

Left ventricular high frame rate echo-particle image velocimetry: feasibility and comparison with conventional echocardiography

On the feasibility of ultrasound Doppler-based personalized hemodynamic modeling of the abdominal aorta

Repeatability and comparison of 2D and 4D flow MRI measurement of intracranial blood flow and pulsatility in healthy individuals and patients with cerebral small vessel disease

In-vivo phase contrast magnetic resonance angiography of the cerebrovascular system: a comparative study with duplex sonography

Hemodynamic Aspects of Vessel Wall Imaging: 4D Flow

Comparison of pulsatile flow dynamics before and after endovascular intervention in 3D-printed patient-specific internal carotid artery aneurysm models using 1000 fps photon-counting detectors for Simultaneous Biplane High Speed Angiography (SB-HSA)

Four-Dimensional Flow MRI for the Evaluation of Aortic Endovascular Graft: A Pilot Study

Validation of 2D flow MRI for helical and vortical flows

A dual-VENC 4D Flow MRI Framework for Analysis of Subject-Specific Heterogeneous non-linear Vessel Deformation

Impact of the evaluation method on 4D flow-derived diastolic transmitral and myocardial peak velocities: Comparison with echocardiography

In-vitro and In-Vivo Assessment of 4D Flow MRI Reynolds Stress Mapping for Pulsatile Blood Flow