Henri J M M Mutsaerts1, Rebecca M E Steketee2, Dennis F R Heijtel3, Joost P A Kuijer4, Matthijs J P van Osch5, Charles B L M Majoie3, Marion Smits2, Aart J Nederveen3. 1. Department of Radiology, G1-230, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. henkjanmutsaerts@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Radiology, G1-230, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Physics and Medical Technology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECT: The current study assesses the multicenter feasibility of pharmacological arterial spin labeling (ASL) by comparing a caffeine-induced relative cerebral blood flow decrease (%CBF↓) measured with two pseudo-continuous ASL sequences as provided by two major vendors. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Twenty-two healthy volunteers were scanned twice with both a 3D spiral (GE) and a 2D EPI (Philips) sequence. The inter-session reproducibility was evaluated by comparisons of the mean and within-subject coefficient of variability (wsCV) of the %CBF↓, both for the total cerebral gray matter and on a voxel level. RESULTS: The %CBF↓ was larger when measured with the 3D spiral sequence (23.9 ± 5.9 %) than when measured with the 2D EPI sequence (19.2 ± 5.6 %) on a total gray matter level (p = 0.02), and on a voxel level in the posterior watershed area (p < 0.001). There was no difference between the gray matter wsCV of the 3D spiral (57.3 %) and 2D EPI sequence (66.7 %, p = 0.3), whereas on a voxel level, the wsCV was visibly different between the sequences. CONCLUSION: The observed differences between ASL sequences of both vendors can be explained by differences in the employed readout modules. These differences may seriously hamper multicenter pharmacological ASL, which strongly encourages standardization of ASL implementations.
RCT Entities:
OBJECT: The current study assesses the multicenter feasibility of pharmacological arterial spin labeling (ASL) by comparing a caffeine-induced relative cerebral blood flow decrease (%CBF↓) measured with two pseudo-continuous ASL sequences as provided by two major vendors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-two healthy volunteers were scanned twice with both a 3D spiral (GE) and a 2D EPI (Philips) sequence. The inter-session reproducibility was evaluated by comparisons of the mean and within-subject coefficient of variability (wsCV) of the %CBF↓, both for the total cerebral gray matter and on a voxel level. RESULTS: The %CBF↓ was larger when measured with the 3D spiral sequence (23.9 ± 5.9 %) than when measured with the 2D EPI sequence (19.2 ± 5.6 %) on a total gray matter level (p = 0.02), and on a voxel level in the posterior watershed area (p < 0.001). There was no difference between the gray matter wsCV of the 3D spiral (57.3 %) and 2D EPI sequence (66.7 %, p = 0.3), whereas on a voxel level, the wsCV was visibly different between the sequences. CONCLUSION: The observed differences between ASL sequences of both vendors can be explained by differences in the employed readout modules. These differences may seriously hamper multicenter pharmacological ASL, which strongly encourages standardization of ASL implementations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Magnetic resonance imaging; Multicenter studies as topic; Perfusion; Pharmacological biomarkers; Reproducibility of results
Authors: Fernando O Zelaya; Evangelos Zois; Christopher Muller-Pollard; David J Lythgoe; Sarah Lee; Caroline Andrews; Trevor Smart; Patricia Conrod; William Vennart; Steven C R Williams; Mitul A Mehta; Laurence J Reed Journal: MAGMA Date: 2011-11-24 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Hanzhang Lu; Lidia M Nagae-Poetscher; Xavier Golay; Doris Lin; Martin Pomper; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Sina Aslan; Feng Xu; Peiying L Wang; Jinsoo Uh; Uma S Yezhuvath; Matthias van Osch; Hanzhang Lu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Rowena Handley; Fernando O Zelaya; A A T Simone Reinders; Tiago Reis Marques; Mitul A Mehta; Ruth O'Gorman; David C Alsop; Heather Taylor; Atholl Johnston; Steve Williams; Philip McGuire; Carmine M Pariante; Shitij Kapur; Paola Dazzan Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2012-03-25 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Henri J M M Mutsaerts; Rebecca M E Steketee; Dennis F R Heijtel; Joost P A Kuijer; Matthias J P van Osch; Charles B L M Majoie; Marion Smits; Aart J Nederveen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-08-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Najmeh Khalili-Mahani; Serge A R B Rombouts; Matthias J P van Osch; Eugene P Duff; Felix Carbonell; Lisa D Nickerson; Lino Becerra; Albert Dahan; Alan C Evans; Jean-Paul Soucy; Richard Wise; Alex P Zijdenbos; Joop M van Gerven Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Henri J M M Mutsaerts; Jan Petr; David L Thomas; Enrico De Vita; David M Cash; Matthias J P van Osch; Xavier Golay; Paul F C Groot; Sebastien Ourselin; John van Swieten; Robert Laforce; Fabrizio Tagliavini; Barbara Borroni; Daniela Galimberti; James B Rowe; Caroline Graff; Francesca B Pizzini; Elizabeth Finger; Sandro Sorbi; Miguel Castelo Branco; Jonathan D Rohrer; Mario Masellis; Bradley J MacIntosh Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Joana Pinto; Michael A Chappell; Thomas W Okell; Melvin Mezue; Andrew R Segerdahl; Irene Tracey; Pedro Vilela; Patrícia Figueiredo Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 4.668