PURPOSE: To develop a technique for optimizing coverage of brain 3D (1) H magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) by automatic placement of outer-volume suppression (OVS) saturation bands (sat bands) and to compare the performance for point-resolved spectroscopic sequence (PRESS) MRSI protocols with manual and automatic placement of sat bands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The automated OVS procedure includes the acquisition of anatomic images from the head, obtaining brain and lipid tissue maps, calculating optimal sat band placement, and then using those optimized parameters during the MRSI acquisition. The data were analyzed to quantify brain coverage volume and data quality. RESULTS: 3D PRESS MRSI data were acquired from three healthy volunteers and 29 patients using protocols that included either manual or automatic sat band placement. On average, the automatic sat band placement allowed the acquisition of PRESS MRSI data from 2.7 times larger brain volumes than the conventional method while maintaining data quality. CONCLUSION: The technique developed helps solve two of the most significant problems with brain PRESS MRSI acquisitions: limited brain coverage and difficulty in prescription. This new method will facilitate routine clinical brain 3D MRSI exams and will be important for performing serial evaluation of response to therapy in patients with brain tumors and other neurological diseases.
PURPOSE: To develop a technique for optimizing coverage of brain 3D (1) H magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) by automatic placement of outer-volume suppression (OVS) saturation bands (sat bands) and to compare the performance for point-resolved spectroscopic sequence (PRESS) MRSI protocols with manual and automatic placement of sat bands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The automated OVS procedure includes the acquisition of anatomic images from the head, obtaining brain and lipid tissue maps, calculating optimal sat band placement, and then using those optimized parameters during the MRSI acquisition. The data were analyzed to quantify brain coverage volume and data quality. RESULTS: 3D PRESS MRSI data were acquired from three healthy volunteers and 29 patients using protocols that included either manual or automatic sat band placement. On average, the automatic sat band placement allowed the acquisition of PRESS MRSI data from 2.7 times larger brain volumes than the conventional method while maintaining data quality. CONCLUSION: The technique developed helps solve two of the most significant problems with brain PRESS MRSI acquisitions: limited brain coverage and difficulty in prescription. This new method will facilitate routine clinical brain 3D MRSI exams and will be important for performing serial evaluation of response to therapy in patients with brain tumors and other neurological diseases.
Authors: T K Tran; D B Vigneron; N Sailasuta; J Tropp; P Le Roux; J Kurhanewicz; S Nelson; R Hurd Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: A Narayana; J Chang; S Thakur; W Huang; S Karimi; B Hou; A Kowalski; G Perera; A Holodny; P H Gutin Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2006-10-26 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Yan Li; Radhika Srinivasan; Helene Ratiney; Ying Lu; Susan M Chang; Sarah J Nelson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: M Rijpkema; J Schuuring; Y van der Meulen; M van der Graaf; H Bernsen; R Boerman; A van der Kogel; A Heerschap Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Susan M Chang; Sarah Nelson; Scott Vandenberg; Soonmee Cha; Michael Prados; Nicholas Butowski; Michael McDermott; Andrew T Parsa; Manish Aghi; Jennifer Clarke; Mitchel Berger Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2009-04-09 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: H P Hetherington; J W Pan; G F Mason; S L Ponder; D B Twieg; G Deutsch; J Mountz; G M Pohost Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 1994-10 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Elke Hattingen; Oliver Delic; Kea Franz; Ulrich Pilatus; Peter Raab; Heinrich Lanfermann; Rüdiger Gerlach Journal: Neurol Res Date: 2009-09-01 Impact factor: 2.448
Authors: Forrest W Crawford; Inas S Khayal; Colleen McGue; Suja Saraswathy; Andrea Pirzkall; Soonmee Cha; Kathleen R Lamborn; Susan M Chang; Mitchel S Berger; Sarah J Nelson Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2008-11-15 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Young Woo Park; Dinesh K Deelchand; James M Joers; Brian Hanna; Adam Berrington; Joseph S Gillen; Kejal Kantarci; Brian J Soher; Peter B Barker; HyunWook Park; Gülin Öz; Christophe Lenglet Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Yan Li; Peder Larson; Albert P Chen; Janine M Lupo; Eugene Ozhinsky; Douglas Kelley; Susan M Chang; Sarah J Nelson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Ivan Tkáč; Dinesh Deelchand; Wolfgang Dreher; Hoby Hetherington; Roland Kreis; Chathura Kumaragamage; Michal Považan; Daniel M Spielman; Bernhard Strasser; Robin A de Graaf Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-12-16 Impact factor: 4.478
Authors: Andrew A Maudsley; Ovidiu C Andronesi; Peter B Barker; Alberto Bizzi; Wolfgang Bogner; Anke Henning; Sarah J Nelson; Stefan Posse; Dikoma C Shungu; Brian J Soher Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 4.044