Anna S Rydhög1, Matthias J P van Osch2, Emelie Lindgren3, Markus Nilsson4, Jimmy Lätt5, Freddy Ståhlberg6, Ronnie Wirestam3, Linda Knutsson3. 1. Department of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Electronic address: Anna.Rydhog@med.lu.se. 2. C. J. Gorter Center for High Field MRI, Department of Radiology, LUMC, Leiden, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 4. Department of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; Lund University Bioimaging Center (LBIC), Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 5. Center for Medical Imaging and Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden. 6. Department of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; Lund University Bioimaging Center (LBIC), Lund University, Lund, Sweden; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to limited SNR the cerebral applications of the intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) concept have been sparse. MRI hardware developments have resulted in improved SNR and this may justify a reassessment of IVIM imaging for non-invasive quantification of the cerebral blood volume (CBV) as a first step toward determining the optimal field strength. PURPOSE: To investigate intravoxel incoherent motion imaging for its potential to assess cerebral blood volume (CBV) at three different MRI field strengths. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four volunteers were scanned twice at 1.5 T, 3 T as well as 7 T. By correcting for field-strength-dependent effects of relaxation, estimates of corrected CBV (cCBV) were obtained in deep gray matter (DGM), frontal gray matter (FGM) and frontal white matter (FWM), using Bayesian analysis. In addition, simulations were performed to facilitate the interpretation of experimental data. RESULTS: In DGM, FGM and FWM we obtained cCBV estimates of 2.2 ml/100 ml, 2.7 ml/100 ml, 1.4 ml/100 ml at 1.5 T; 3.7 ml/100 ml, 5.0 ml/100 ml, 3.2 ml/100 ml at 3 T and 15.5 ml/100 ml, 20.3 ml/100 ml, 7.0 ml/100 ml at 7 T. CONCLUSION: Quantitative cCBV values obtained at 1.5 T and 3 T corresponded better to physiological reference values, while 7 T showed the largest deviation from expected values. Simulations of synthetic tissue voxels indicated that the discrepancy at 7 T can partly be explained by SNR issues. Results were generally more repeatable at 7 T (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC=0.84) than at 1.5 T (ICC=0.68) and 3 T (ICC=0.46).
BACKGROUND: Due to limited SNR the cerebral applications of the intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) concept have been sparse. MRI hardware developments have resulted in improved SNR and this may justify a reassessment of IVIM imaging for non-invasive quantification of the cerebral blood volume (CBV) as a first step toward determining the optimal field strength. PURPOSE: To investigate intravoxel incoherent motion imaging for its potential to assess cerebral blood volume (CBV) at three different MRI field strengths. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four volunteers were scanned twice at 1.5 T, 3 T as well as 7 T. By correcting for field-strength-dependent effects of relaxation, estimates of corrected CBV (cCBV) were obtained in deep gray matter (DGM), frontal gray matter (FGM) and frontal white matter (FWM), using Bayesian analysis. In addition, simulations were performed to facilitate the interpretation of experimental data. RESULTS: In DGM, FGM and FWM we obtained cCBV estimates of 2.2 ml/100 ml, 2.7 ml/100 ml, 1.4 ml/100 ml at 1.5 T; 3.7 ml/100 ml, 5.0 ml/100 ml, 3.2 ml/100 ml at 3 T and 15.5 ml/100 ml, 20.3 ml/100 ml, 7.0 ml/100 ml at 7 T. CONCLUSION: Quantitative cCBV values obtained at 1.5 T and 3 T corresponded better to physiological reference values, while 7 T showed the largest deviation from expected values. Simulations of synthetic tissue voxels indicated that the discrepancy at 7 T can partly be explained by SNR issues. Results were generally more repeatable at 7 T (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC=0.84) than at 1.5 T (ICC=0.68) and 3 T (ICC=0.46).
Authors: Anna S Rydhög; Filip Szczepankiewicz; Ronnie Wirestam; André Ahlgren; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Linda Knutsson; Ofer Pasternak Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Paddy J Slator; Marco Palombo; Karla L Miller; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Frederik Laun; Daeun Kim; Justin P Haldar; Dan Benjamini; Gregory Lemberskiy; Joao P de Almeida Martins; Jana Hutter Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-08-19 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: S M Wong; W H Backes; C E Zhang; J Staals; R J van Oostenbrugge; C R L P N Jeukens; J F A Jansen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yuriko Suzuki; Michael Helle; Peter Koken; Marc Van Cauteren; Matthias J P van Osch Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: André Ahlgren; Linda Knutsson; Ronnie Wirestam; Markus Nilsson; Freddy Ståhlberg; Daniel Topgaard; Samo Lasič Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2016-03-08 Impact factor: 4.044