Literature DB >> 19488992

Quantification of pulmonary blood flow (PBF): validation of perfusion MRI and nonlinear contrast agent (CA) dose correction with H(2)15O positron emission tomography (PET).

Daniel Neeb1, Rainer Peter Kunz, Sebastian Ley, Gábor Szábo, Ludwig G Strauss, Hans-Ulrich Kauczor, Karl-Friedrich Kreitner, Laura Maria Schreiber.   

Abstract

Validation of quantification of pulmonary blood flow (PBF) with dynamic, contrast-enhanced MRI is still missing. A possible reason certainly lies in difficulties based on the nonlinear dependence of signal intensity (SI) from contrast agent (CA) concentration. Both aspects were addressed in this study. Nine healthy pigs were examined by first-pass perfusion MRI using gadolinium diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-DTPA) and H(2)(15)O positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. Calculations of hemodynamic parameters were based on a one-compartment model (MR) and a two-compartment model (PET). Simulations showed a significant error when assuming a linear relation between MR SI and CA dose in the arterial input function (AIF), even at low doses of 0.025 mmol/kg body weight (BW). To correct for nonlinearity, a calibration curve was calculated on the basis of the signal equation. The required accuracy of equation parameters (like longitudinal relaxation time) was evaluated. Error analysis estimates <5% over-/underestimation of the corrected SI. Comparison of PET and MR flow values yielded a significant correlation (P < 0.001) in dorsal regions where signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was sufficient. Changes in PBF due to the correction method were significant (P < 0.001) and resulted in a better agreement: mean values (standard deviation) in units of ml/min/100 ml lung tissue were 59 (15) for PET, 112 (28) for uncorrected MRI, and 80 (21) for corrected MRI. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19488992     DOI: 10.1002/mrm.22025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Med        ISSN: 0740-3194            Impact factor:   4.668


  7 in total

Review 1.  Imaging lung perfusion.

Authors:  Susan R Hopkins; Mark O Wielpütz; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2012-05-17

2.  In vivo imaging of the progression of acute lung injury using hyperpolarized [1-13 C] pyruvate.

Authors:  Mehrdad Pourfathi; Yi Xin; Stephen J Kadlecek; Maurizio F Cereda; Harrilla Profka; Hooman Hamedani; Sarmad M Siddiqui; Kai Ruppert; Nicholas A Drachman; Jennia N Rajaei; Rahim R Rizi
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Arterial input function placement effect on computed tomography lung perfusion maps.

Authors:  Laura Jimenez-Juan; Hatem Mehrez; Chris Dey; Shabnam Homampour; Anastasia Oikonomou; Fatima Ursani; Narinder Paul
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2016-02

Review 4.  "Structure-Function Imaging of Lung Disease Using Ultrashort Echo Time MRI".

Authors:  Luis Torres; Jeff Kammerman; Andrew D Hahn; Wei Zha; Scott K Nagle; Kevin Johnson; Nathan Sandbo; Keith Meyer; Mark Schiebler; Sean B Fain
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  Comparison of models and contrast agents for improved signal and signal linearity in dynamic contrast-enhanced pulmonary magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Laura C Bell; Kang Wang; Alejandro Munoz Del Rio; Thomas M Grist; Sean B Fain; Scott K Nagle
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 6.016

6.  Staged cardiovascular magnetic resonance for differential diagnosis of troponin T positive patients with low likelihood for acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Henning Steen; Media Madadi-Schroeder; Stephanie Lehrke; Dirk Lossnitzer; Evangelos Giannitsis; Hugo A Katus
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2010-09-14       Impact factor: 5.364

7.  Assessment of regional pulmonary blood flow using 68Ga-DOTA PET.

Authors:  Carlos Velasco; Jesus Mateo; Arnoldo Santos; Adriana Mota-Cobian; Fernando Herranz; Juan Pellico; Ruben A Mota; Samuel España; Jesus Ruiz-Cabello
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 3.138

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.