OBJECT: The purpose of this study was to test, for the first time, whether spectroscopy voxels could be positioned automatically with high accuracy and reproducibility in ultrahigh-field longitudinal magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRS voxels were automatically positioned in two cingulate subregions of 12 healthy subjects using a vendor-provided automatic voxel positioning (AutoAlign) technique, and were manually placed in the same regions of 10 healthy subjects by an experienced technician in three 7 T MRS scan sessions. Different coils were used for manual (24-channel coil) and automatic (32-channel coil) voxel placement, and the effects of signal-to-noise-ratio differences on the spectra were considered. RESULTS: Over three scan sessions and two regions scanned for each subject, a mean voxel geometric overlap ratio of 0.91 for automatic positioning reflected accurate voxel alignment, while the geometric overlap ratio was only 0.70 for voxels placed manually. Comparable voxel positions among the three scan sessions (p > 0.05) indicated high reproducibility of automatic voxel alignment. In comparison, significant voxel displacement among scan sessions (p < 0.05) was found using manual voxel positioning. CONCLUSIONS: In view of the highly accurate and reproducible voxel alignment with automatic voxel positioning, we propose the application of automatic rather than manual voxel positioning in future ultrahigh-field longitudinal MRS studies.
OBJECT: The purpose of this study was to test, for the first time, whether spectroscopy voxels could be positioned automatically with high accuracy and reproducibility in ultrahigh-field longitudinal magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRS voxels were automatically positioned in two cingulate subregions of 12 healthy subjects using a vendor-provided automatic voxel positioning (AutoAlign) technique, and were manually placed in the same regions of 10 healthy subjects by an experienced technician in three 7 T MRS scan sessions. Different coils were used for manual (24-channel coil) and automatic (32-channel coil) voxel placement, and the effects of signal-to-noise-ratio differences on the spectra were considered. RESULTS: Over three scan sessions and two regions scanned for each subject, a mean voxel geometric overlap ratio of 0.91 for automatic positioning reflected accurate voxel alignment, while the geometric overlap ratio was only 0.70 for voxels placed manually. Comparable voxel positions among the three scan sessions (p > 0.05) indicated high reproducibility of automatic voxel alignment. In comparison, significant voxel displacement among scan sessions (p < 0.05) was found using manual voxel positioning. CONCLUSIONS: In view of the highly accurate and reproducible voxel alignment with automatic voxel positioning, we propose the application of automatic rather than manual voxel positioning in future ultrahigh-field longitudinal MRS studies.
Authors: Thomas Benner; Jonathan J Wisco; André J W van der Kouwe; Bruce Fischl; Mark G Vangel; Fred H Hochberg; A Gregory Sorensen Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-02-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: P D Molyneux; P S Tofts; A Fletcher; B Gunn; P Robinson; H Gallagher; I F Moseley; G J Barker; D H Miller Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 1998-07 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Gregory C Sharp; Sashidhar Kollipara; Thomas Madden; Steve B Jiang; Stanley J Rosenthal Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2005-09-21 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Aaron T Hess; M Dylan Tisdall; Ovidiu C Andronesi; Ernesta M Meintjes; André J W van der Kouwe Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-03-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Mai Lin Nguyen; Brooke Willows; Rihan Khan; Alexander Chi; Lyndon Kim; Sherif G Nour; Thomas Sroka; Christine Kerr; Juan Godinez; Melissa Mills; Ulf Karlsson; Gabor Altdorfer; Nam Phong Nguyen; Gordon Jendrasiak Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2014-05-05 Impact factor: 6.244
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: Gülin Öz; Dinesh K Deelchand; Jannie P Wijnen; Vladimír Mlynárik; Lijing Xin; Ralf Mekle; Ralph Noeske; Tom W J Scheenen; Ivan Tkáč Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-01-10 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Maximilian N Voelker; Oliver Kraff; Daniel Brenner; Astrid Wollrab; Oliver Weinberger; Moritz C Berger; Simon Robinson; Wolfgang Bogner; Christopher Wiggins; Robert Trampel; Tony Stöcker; Thoralf Niendorf; Harald H Quick; David G Norris; Mark E Ladd; Oliver Speck Journal: MAGMA Date: 2016-04-20 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Meng Li; Marie Woelfer; Lejla Colic; Adam Safron; Catie Chang; Hans-Jochen Heinze; Oliver Speck; Helen S Mayberg; Bharat B Biswal; Giacomo Salvadore; Anna Fejtova; Martin Walter Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: Siddhee A Sahasrabudhe; Thanharat Silamongkol; Young Woo Park; Alanna Colette; Lynn E Eberly; Bonnie Klimes-Dougan; Lisa D Coles; James C Cloyd; Gülin Öz; Bryon A Mueller; Reena V Kartha; Kathryn R Cullen Journal: J Psychiatr Brain Sci Date: 2021-04-29