Literature DB >> 21604291

Phase-based arterial input function measurements in the femoral arteries for quantification of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI and comparison with DCE-CT.

Johannes G Korporaal1, Cornelis A T van den Berg, Matthias J P van Osch, Greetje Groenendaal, Marco van Vulpen, Uulke A van der Heide.   

Abstract

Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI is useful for diagnosis, treatment monitoring and follow-up of prostate cancer. However, large differences have been reported in the parameter range of the transfer constant K(trans) , making longitudinal studies and comparison of DCE-MRI findings between studies difficult. Large part of this inconsistency in K(trans) values can be attributed to problems with the accurate measurement of the arterial input function (AIF) from the magnitude signal (AIF(MAG) (N) ). Phase-based AIF measurements (AIF(PHASE) ) have been proposed as a more robust alternative to AIF(MAG) (N) measurements. This study compares AIF(PHASE) with AIFs measured with DCE-CT (AIF(CT) ), and the corresponding K(trans) maps in 12 prostate cancer patients. The shape of AIF(PHASE) and AIF(CT) are similar, although differences in the peak height and peak width exist as a result of differences in injection protocol. No significant differences in K(trans) values were found between the DCE-MRI and DCE-CT exams, with median K(trans) values of 0.10 and 0.08 min(-1) for healthy peripheral zone tissue and 0.44 and 0.36 min(-1) for regions suspected of tumor respectively. Therefore, robust quantification of K(trans) values from DCE-MRI exams in the cancerous prostate is feasible with the use of AIF(PHASE) .
Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21604291     DOI: 10.1002/mrm.22905

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


  14 in total

1.  Response-Derived Input Function Estimation for Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI Demonstrated by Anti-DLL4 Treatment in a Murine U87 Xenograft Model.

Authors:  Matthew D Silva; Brittany Yerby; Jodi Moriguchi; Albert Gomez; H Toni Jun; Angela Coxon; Sharon E Ungersma
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Comparison of arterial input functions measured from ultra-fast dynamic contrast enhanced MRI and dynamic contrast enhanced computed tomography in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Shiyang Wang; Zhengfeng Lu; Xiaobing Fan; Milica Medved; Xia Jiang; Steffen Sammet; Ambereen Yousuf; Federico Pineda; Aytekin Oto; Gregory S Karczmar
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  A comparison of two methods for estimating DCE-MRI parameters via individual and cohort based AIFs in prostate cancer: a step towards practical implementation.

Authors:  Andriy Fedorov; Jacob Fluckiger; Gregory D Ayers; Xia Li; Sandeep N Gupta; Clare Tempany; Robert Mulkern; Thomas E Yankeelov; Fiona M Fennessy
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 2.546

4.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of oral squamous cell carcinoma: a preliminary study of the correlations between quantitative parameters and the clinical stage.

Authors:  T Chikui; E Kitamoto; Y Kami; S Kawano; K Kobayashi; T Kamitani; M Obara; K Yoshiura
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Correction of arterial input function in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the liver.

Authors:  Hesheng Wang; Yue Cao
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 6.  Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI to Study Atherosclerotic Plaque Microvasculature.

Authors:  Raf H M van Hoof; Sylvia Heeneman; Joachim E Wildberger; M Eline Kooi
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 5.113

7.  Impact of contrast agent injection duration on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI quantification in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Edzo M E Klawer; Petra J van Houdt; Floris J Pos; Stijn W T P J Heijmink; Matthias J P van Osch; Uulke A van der Heide
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 4.044

8.  Practical dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in small animal models of cancer: data acquisition, data analysis, and interpretation.

Authors:  Stephanie L Barnes; Jennifer G Whisenant; Mary E Loveless; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 6.321

9.  A Multi-Institutional Comparison of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameter Calculations.

Authors: 
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Comparison of Voxel-Wise Tumor Perfusion Changes Measured With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced (DCE) MRI and Volumetric DCE CT in Patients With Metastatic Brain Cancer Treated with Radiosurgery.

Authors:  Catherine Coolens; Brandon Driscoll; Warren Foltz; Carly Pellow; Cynthia Menard; Caroline Chung
Journal:  Tomography       Date:  2016-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.