Comparison of real-time in vivo spectral and vector velocity estimation

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of real-time in vivo spectral and vector velocity estimation

AU - Pedersen, Mads Møller

AU - Pihl, Michael Johannes

AU - Haugaard, Per

AU - Hansen, Jens Munk

AU - Hansen, Kristoffer Lindskov

AU - Nielsen, Michael Bachmann

AU - Jensen, Jørgen Arendt

N1 - Copyright © 2012 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - The purpose of this study is to show whether a newly introduced vector flow method is equal to conventional spectral estimation. Thirty-two common carotid arteries of 16 healthy volunteers were scanned using a BK Medical ProFocus scanner (DK-2730, Herlev, Denmark) and a linear transducer at 5 MHz. A triplex imaging sequence yields both the conventional velocity spectrum and a two-dimensional vector velocity image. Several clinical parameters were estimated and compared for the two methods: Flow angle, peak systole velocity (PS), end diastole velocity (ED) and resistive index (RI). With a paired t-test, the spectral and vector angles did not differ significantly (p = 0.658), whereas PS (p = 0.034), ED (p = 0.004) and RI (p < 0.0001) differed significantly. Vector flow can measure the angle for spectral angle correction, thus eliminating the bias from the radiologist performing the angle setting with spectral estimation. The flow angle limitation in velocity estimation is also eliminated, so that flow at any angle can be measured.

AB - The purpose of this study is to show whether a newly introduced vector flow method is equal to conventional spectral estimation. Thirty-two common carotid arteries of 16 healthy volunteers were scanned using a BK Medical ProFocus scanner (DK-2730, Herlev, Denmark) and a linear transducer at 5 MHz. A triplex imaging sequence yields both the conventional velocity spectrum and a two-dimensional vector velocity image. Several clinical parameters were estimated and compared for the two methods: Flow angle, peak systole velocity (PS), end diastole velocity (ED) and resistive index (RI). With a paired t-test, the spectral and vector angles did not differ significantly (p = 0.658), whereas PS (p = 0.034), ED (p = 0.004) and RI (p < 0.0001) differed significantly. Vector flow can measure the angle for spectral angle correction, thus eliminating the bias from the radiologist performing the angle setting with spectral estimation. The flow angle limitation in velocity estimation is also eliminated, so that flow at any angle can be measured.

U2 - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2011.10.003

DO - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2011.10.003

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 22104521

SN - 0301-5629

VL - 38

SP - 145

EP - 151

JO - Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology

JF - Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology

IS - 1

ER -