PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to investigate systematic errors in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR perfusion studies due to peak saturation of the arterial input function (AIF) and to introduce a simple correction algorithm. METHOD: Computer simulations were performed to evaluate the influence of AIF peak saturation and to demonstrate the effectiveness of the presented correction algorithm. To compare the computer simulations with real MR data, MR perfusion measurements were performed on volunteers. RESULTS: The computer simulations show that AIF peak saturation leads to a systematic overestimation of cerebral blood volume (CBV) and cerebral blood flow (CBF) values, which was confirmed by comparing the obtained MR data with PET results. With use of an improved calculation algorithm correcting for AIF peak saturation, a significant improvement of the obtained CBV and CBF values could be demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that AIF peak saturation leads to a significant systematic error in the determination of CBV and CBF values and has necessarily to be taken into account for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR perfusion studies.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to investigate systematic errors in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR perfusion studies due to peak saturation of the arterial input function (AIF) and to introduce a simple correction algorithm. METHOD: Computer simulations were performed to evaluate the influence of AIF peak saturation and to demonstrate the effectiveness of the presented correction algorithm. To compare the computer simulations with real MR data, MR perfusion measurements were performed on volunteers. RESULTS: The computer simulations show that AIF peak saturation leads to a systematic overestimation of cerebral blood volume (CBV) and cerebral blood flow (CBF) values, which was confirmed by comparing the obtained MR data with PET results. With use of an improved calculation algorithm correcting for AIF peak saturation, a significant improvement of the obtained CBV and CBF values could be demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that AIF peak saturation leads to a significant systematic error in the determination of CBV and CBF values and has necessarily to be taken into account for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR perfusion studies.
Authors: D Ducreux; I Buvat; J F Meder; D Mikulis; A Crawley; D Fredy; K TerBrugge; P Lasjaunias; J Bittoun Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Heiko Schmiedeskamp; Matus Straka; Rexford D Newbould; Greg Zaharchuk; Jalal B Andre; Jean-Marc Olivot; Michael E Moseley; Gregory W Albers; Roland Bammer Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-11-23 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kenneth K Kwong; Timothy G Reese; Koen Nelissen; Ona Wu; Suk-Tak Chan; Thomas Benner; Joseph B Mandeville; Mary Foley; Wim Vanduffel; David A Chesler Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2010-09-17 Impact factor: 6.556