PURPOSE: Contrast agents for chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI often require an accurate measurement of the chemical exchange rate. Many analysis methods have been reported that measure chemical exchange rates. Additional analysis methods were derived as part of this study. This report investigated the accuracy and precision of each analysis method. METHODS: Chemical exchange saturation transfer spectra were simulated using the Bloch-McConnell equations modified for chemical exchange. Chemical exchange saturation transfer spectra of iopromide were obtained with a range of saturation times, saturation powers, and concentrations. These simulated and experimental results were used to estimate the chemical exchange rate using the QUESP, QUEST, Omega Plot (LB-QUESP), EH-QUESP, HW-QUESP, LB-Conc, EH-Conc, and HW-Conc methods. RESULTS: Bloch fitting produced the most precise estimates of chemical exchange rates, although substantial expertise and computation time were required to achieve these results. Of the more simplistic analysis methods, the HW-QUESP method produced the most accurate and precise estimates of fast exchange rates. The QUEST and LB-QUESP methods produced the most accurate estimates of slow exchange rates, especially with samples that have short T(1w) relaxation times. CONCLUSIONS: HW-QUESP is a simplistic analysis method that should be used when fast chemical exchange rates need to be estimated from chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI results.
PURPOSE: Contrast agents for chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI often require an accurate measurement of the chemical exchange rate. Many analysis methods have been reported that measure chemical exchange rates. Additional analysis methods were derived as part of this study. This report investigated the accuracy and precision of each analysis method. METHODS: Chemical exchange saturation transfer spectra were simulated using the Bloch-McConnell equations modified for chemical exchange. Chemical exchange saturation transfer spectra of iopromide were obtained with a range of saturation times, saturation powers, and concentrations. These simulated and experimental results were used to estimate the chemical exchange rate using the QUESP, QUEST, Omega Plot (LB-QUESP), EH-QUESP, HW-QUESP, LB-Conc, EH-Conc, and HW-Conc methods. RESULTS: Bloch fitting produced the most precise estimates of chemical exchange rates, although substantial expertise and computation time were required to achieve these results. Of the more simplistic analysis methods, the HW-QUESP method produced the most accurate and precise estimates of fast exchange rates. The QUEST and LB-QUESP methods produced the most accurate estimates of slow exchange rates, especially with samples that have short T(1w) relaxation times. CONCLUSIONS: HW-QUESP is a simplistic analysis method that should be used when fast chemical exchange rates need to be estimated from chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI results.
Authors: Phillip Zhe Sun; Enfeng Wang; Jerry S Cheung; Xiaoan Zhang; Thomas Benner; A Gregory Sorensen Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Guanshu Liu; M Meser Ali; Byunghee Yoo; Mark A Griswold; Jean A Tkach; Mark D Pagel Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Sanhita Sinharay; Edward A Randtke; Christine M Howison; Natalia A Ignatenko; Mark D Pagel Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Xiaolei Song; Xing Yang; Sangeeta Ray Banerjee; Martin G Pomper; Michael T McMahon Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging Date: 2014-04-28 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Ouri Cohen; Shuning Huang; Michael T McMahon; Matthew S Rosen; Christian T Farrar Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-05-13 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Edward A Randtke; Jeffry C Granados; Christine M Howison; Mark D Pagel; Julio Cárdenas-Rodríguez Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Gabriela Fernández-Cuervo; Kirsten A Tucker; Scott W Malm; Kyle M Jones; Mark D Pagel Journal: Bioconjug Chem Date: 2016-10-06 Impact factor: 4.774