Precise Estimation of Intravascular Pressure Gradients

This study presents a method for noninvasive pressure gradient estimation, which allows the detection of small pressure differences with higher precision compared to invasive catheters. It combines a new method for estimating the temporal acceleration of the flowing blood with the Navier–Stokes equation. The acceleration estimation is based on a double cross-correlation approach, which is hypothesized to minimize the influence of noise. Data are acquired using a 256-element, 6.5-MHz GE L3-12-D linear array transducer connected to a Verasonics research scanner. A synthetic aperture (SA) interleaved sequence with
${2} \times {12}$
virtual sources evenly distributed over the aperture and permuted in emission order is used in combination with recursive imaging. This enables a temporal resolution between correlation frames equal to the pulse repetition time at a frame rate of half the pulse repetition frequency. The accuracy of the method is evaluated against a computational fluid dynamic simulation. Here, the estimated total pressure difference complies with the CFD reference pressure difference, which yields an
${R}$
-square of 0.985 and an RMSE of 3.03 Pa. The precision of the method is tested on experimental data, measured on a carotid phantom of the common carotid artery. The volume profile used during measurement was set to mimic flow in the carotid artery with a peak flow rate of 12.9 mL/s. The experimental setup showed that the measured pressure difference changes from −59.4 to 31 Pa throughout a single pulse cycle. This was estimated with a precision of 5.44% (3.22 Pa) across ten pulse cycles. The method was also compared to invasive catheter measurements in a phantom with a 60% cross-sectional area reduction. The ultrasound method detected a maximum pressure difference of 72.3 Pa with a precision of 3.3% (2.22 Pa). The catheters measured a maximum pressure difference of 105 Pa with a precision of 11.2% (11.4 Pa). This was measured over the same constriction and with a peak flow rate of 12.9 mL/s. The double cross-correlation approach revealed no improvement compared to a normal differential operator. The method’s strength, thus, lies primarily in the ultrasound sequence, which allows precise and accurate velocity estimations, at which acceleration and pressure differences can be acquired.