S Huck1, H U Kerl, M Al-Zghloul, C Groden, I Nölte. 1. Department of Neuroradiology, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Arterial spin labeling (ASL) is a promising but clinically not established non-invasive method to assess cerebral perfusion. The purpose of this study was to compare perfusion imaging with pulsed ASL (pASL) to conventional dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion-weighted imaging (PWL) using commercially available equipment and postprocessing (3.0 Tesla, 32-channel head coil) in patients with subacute ischemia. METHODS: The pASL and DSC-PWI techniques were compared in 15 patients with subacute ischemia (age 49-88 years, 6 females and 9 males, time from onset to scan 4-161 h). Image inhomogeneity was assessed with the non-uniformity index. Image quality, delineation of hypoperfusion and degree of hypoperfusion were rated by two readers using a 5-scale grading system. The volume of hypoperfusion was quantified planimetrically. RESULTS: Image quality and image inhomogeneity were superior in DSC time-to-peak (TTP) compared to pASL cerebral brain flow (CBF; both p < 0.05). The delineation of hypoperfusion was better in DSC-TTP (p < 0.05) and the hypoperfusion was graded as more severe in DSC-TTP (p < 0.05). The volume of hypoperfusion did not differ between pASL-CBF and DSC-TTP, however, in pASL-CBF five cases with small infarctions (lacunar and pontine) were false negative compared to DSC-relative CBF. The mismatch frequency was lower in pASL (13%) than in DSC-rCBF (20%) and DSC-TTP (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Using a commercially available sequence and a 32-channel head coil at 3.0 Tesla pASL-CBF is feasible but limited compared to DSC-PWI in the assessment of ischemic stroke. In its present form pASL has a reserve role in clinical practice for situations when gadolinium diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-DTPA) is contraindicated.
PURPOSE: Arterial spin labeling (ASL) is a promising but clinically not established non-invasive method to assess cerebral perfusion. The purpose of this study was to compare perfusion imaging with pulsed ASL (pASL) to conventional dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion-weighted imaging (PWL) using commercially available equipment and postprocessing (3.0 Tesla, 32-channel head coil) in patients with subacute ischemia. METHODS: The pASL and DSC-PWI techniques were compared in 15 patients with subacute ischemia (age 49-88 years, 6 females and 9 males, time from onset to scan 4-161 h). Image inhomogeneity was assessed with the non-uniformity index. Image quality, delineation of hypoperfusion and degree of hypoperfusion were rated by two readers using a 5-scale grading system. The volume of hypoperfusion was quantified planimetrically. RESULTS: Image quality and image inhomogeneity were superior in DSC time-to-peak (TTP) compared to pASL cerebral brain flow (CBF; both p < 0.05). The delineation of hypoperfusion was better in DSC-TTP (p < 0.05) and the hypoperfusion was graded as more severe in DSC-TTP (p < 0.05). The volume of hypoperfusion did not differ between pASL-CBF and DSC-TTP, however, in pASL-CBF five cases with small infarctions (lacunar and pontine) were false negative compared to DSC-relative CBF. The mismatch frequency was lower in pASL (13%) than in DSC-rCBF (20%) and DSC-TTP (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Using a commercially available sequence and a 32-channel head coil at 3.0 Tesla pASL-CBF is feasible but limited compared to DSC-PWI in the assessment of ischemic stroke. In its present form pASL has a reserve role in clinical practice for situations when gadolinium diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-DTPA) is contraindicated.
Authors: Ronald L Wolf; David C Alsop; Michael L McGarvey; Joseph A Maldjian; Jiongjiong Wang; John A Detre Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: H Kimura; H Takeuchi; Y Koshimoto; H Arishima; H Uematsu; Y Kawamura; T Kubota; H Itoh Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A T Du; G H Jahng; S Hayasaka; J H Kramer; H J Rosen; M L Gorno-Tempini; K P Rankin; B L Miller; M W Weiner; N Schuff Journal: Neurology Date: 2006-10-10 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: R L Wolf; D C Alsop; I Levy-Reis; P T Meyer; J A Maldjian; J Gonzalez-Atavales; J A French; A Alavi; J A Detre Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Bhaswati Roy; Mary A Woo; Danny J J Wang; Gregg C Fonarow; Ronald M Harper; Rajesh Kumar Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Alex Förster; Hans Ulrich Kerl; Holger Wenz; Marc A Brockmann; Ingo Nölte; Christoph Groden Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Matthias A Mutke; Vince I Madai; Federico C von Samson-Himmelstjerna; Olivier Zaro Weber; Gajanan S Revankar; Steve Z Martin; Katharina L Stengl; Miriam Bauer; Stefan Hetzer; Matthias Günther; Jan Sobesky Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sangjoon Lee; Dong Woo Park; Tae Yoon Kim; Dong Sun Kim; Ji Young Lee; Young-Jun Lee; Chun Ki Kim Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-01-24 Impact factor: 3.240