PURPOSE: To investigate intra- and interscanner in vivo reproducibility of brain metabolite quantification using 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (1H-MRSI) (PRESS localization, TE = 30 msec, voxel volume = 2.3 mL) and the linear combination model (LCModel). MATERIALS AND METHODS: One subject had a total of nine scans on three occasions at a single site, and three subjects had single scans at two sites. Coefficients of variation (CVs) were estimated using different statistical models applied to intra- and interscanner data; therefore, only qualitative comparisons may be made between results. RESULTS: CV (intra-/interscanner) for metabolite quantifications were choline, 12.3%/10.1%; creatine, 9.9%/10.6%; glutamate + glutamine, 15.8%/13.6%; myo-inositol, 18.5%/14.7%; and N-acetyl-aspartate + N-acetyl-aspartyl-glutamate, 6.1%/7.0%. Overall, total intra- and intersubject variability was greater than intra- and interscanner variability. CONCLUSION: When quantifying metabolic concentrations using the methods employed in this study, biological factors contribute a greater proportion to measurement variability than measurement errors. Using this technique, intra- and intersite measurement errors are of the same order. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PURPOSE: To investigate intra- and interscanner in vivo reproducibility of brain metabolite quantification using 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (1H-MRSI) (PRESS localization, TE = 30 msec, voxel volume = 2.3 mL) and the linear combination model (LCModel). MATERIALS AND METHODS: One subject had a total of nine scans on three occasions at a single site, and three subjects had single scans at two sites. Coefficients of variation (CVs) were estimated using different statistical models applied to intra- and interscanner data; therefore, only qualitative comparisons may be made between results. RESULTS: CV (intra-/interscanner) for metabolite quantifications were choline, 12.3%/10.1%; creatine, 9.9%/10.6%; glutamate + glutamine, 15.8%/13.6%; myo-inositol, 18.5%/14.7%; and N-acetyl-aspartate + N-acetyl-aspartyl-glutamate, 6.1%/7.0%. Overall, total intra- and intersubject variability was greater than intra- and interscanner variability. CONCLUSION: When quantifying metabolic concentrations using the methods employed in this study, biological factors contribute a greater proportion to measurement variability than measurement errors. Using this technique, intra- and intersite measurement errors are of the same order. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Frank Träber; Wolfgang Block; Nikolaus Freymann; Okan Gür; Thomas Kucinski; Thilo Hammen; Gabriele Ende; Ulrich Pilatus; Harald Hampel; Hans H Schild; Reinhard Heun; Frank Jessen Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2006-01-17 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: B L van de Bank; U E Emir; V O Boer; J J A van Asten; M C Maas; J P Wijnen; H E Kan; G Oz; D W J Klomp; T W J Scheenen Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2015-01-08 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: O T Wiebenga; A M Klauser; M M Schoonheim; G J A Nagtegaal; M D Steenwijk; J A van Rossum; C H Polman; F Barkhof; P J W Pouwels; J J G Geurts Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Ivan I Kirov; Ilena C George; Nikhil Jayawickrama; James S Babb; Nissa N Perry; Oded Gonen Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-06-07 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Karl Young; Varan Govind; Khema Sharma; Colin Studholme; Andrew A Maudsley; Norbert Schuff Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Matilde Inglese; Henry Rusinek; Ilena C George; James S Babb; Robert I Grossman; Oded Gonen Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: P A Caruso; T Y Poussaint; A A Tzika; D Zurakowski; L G Astrakas; E R Elias; C Bay; M B Irons Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2003-11-05 Impact factor: 2.804