Shin-Lei Peng1,2,3, Pan Su1,2,4, Fu-Nien Wang3, Yan Cao5, Rong Zhang6, Hanzhang Lu1,2,4, Peiying Liu1,2. 1. Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. Advanced Imaging Research Center, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering and Environmental Sciences, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan. 4. Biomedical Engineering Graduate Program, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 5. Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas, USA. 6. Institute for Exercise and Environmental Medicine, Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whole-brain cerebral blood flow (CBF) measured by phase-contrast MRI (PC-MRI) provides an important index for brain function. This work aimed to optimize the PC-MRI imaging protocol for accurate CBF measurements. METHODS: Two studies were performed on a 3 Tesla system. In Study 1 (N = 12), we optimized in-plane resolution of PC-MRI acquisition for CBF quantification by considering accuracy, precision, and scan duration. In Study 2 (N = 7), we assessed the detrimental effect of nonperpendicular imaging slice orientation on CBF quantification. Both One-way analysis of variance with repeated measurement and Friedman test were used to examine the effects of resolution and angulation on CBF quantification. Additionally, we evaluated the inter-rater reliability in PC-MRI data processing. RESULTS: Our results showed that CBF measurement with 0.7 mm resolution could be overestimated by up to 13.3% when compared with 0.4 mm resolution. Moreover, CBF could also be overestimated by up to 18.8% when the slice orientation is deviated by 30° from the ideal angulation. However, within 10° of the ideal slice orientation, estimated CBF was not significantly different from each other (P = 0.23 and 0.45 for internal carotid artery and vertebral artery, respectively). Inter-rater difference was <3%. CONCLUSION: For fast and accurate quantification of whole-brain CBF with PC-MRI, we recommend the use of an imaging resolution of 0.5 mm and a slice orientation that is less than 10° from vessel's axial plane.
BACKGROUND: Whole-brain cerebral blood flow (CBF) measured by phase-contrast MRI (PC-MRI) provides an important index for brain function. This work aimed to optimize the PC-MRI imaging protocol for accurate CBF measurements. METHODS: Two studies were performed on a 3 Tesla system. In Study 1 (N = 12), we optimized in-plane resolution of PC-MRI acquisition for CBF quantification by considering accuracy, precision, and scan duration. In Study 2 (N = 7), we assessed the detrimental effect of nonperpendicular imaging slice orientation on CBF quantification. Both One-way analysis of variance with repeated measurement and Friedman test were used to examine the effects of resolution and angulation on CBF quantification. Additionally, we evaluated the inter-rater reliability in PC-MRI data processing. RESULTS: Our results showed that CBF measurement with 0.7 mm resolution could be overestimated by up to 13.3% when compared with 0.4 mm resolution. Moreover, CBF could also be overestimated by up to 18.8% when the slice orientation is deviated by 30° from the ideal angulation. However, within 10° of the ideal slice orientation, estimated CBF was not significantly different from each other (P = 0.23 and 0.45 for internal carotid artery and vertebral artery, respectively). Inter-rater difference was <3%. CONCLUSION: For fast and accurate quantification of whole-brain CBF with PC-MRI, we recommend the use of an imaging resolution of 0.5 mm and a slice orientation that is less than 10° from vessel's axial plane.
Authors: Varsha Jain; Erin M Buckley; Daniel J Licht; Jennifer M Lynch; Peter J Schwab; Maryam Y Naim; Natasha A Lavin; Susan C Nicolson; Lisa M Montenegro; Arjun G Yodh; Felix W Wehrli Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Stephan Meckel; Lorenz Leitner; Leo H Bonati; Francesco Santini; Tilman Schubert; Aurelien F Stalder; Philippe Lyrer; Michael Markl; Stephan G Wetzel Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2012-11-10 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Manus J Donahue; Lindsey M Dethrage; Carlos C Faraco; Lori C Jordan; Paul Clemmons; Robert Singer; J Mocco; Yu Shyr; Aditi Desai; Anne O'Duffy; Derek Riebau; Lisa Hermann; John Connors; Howard Kirshner; Megan K Strother Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Zhiliang Wei; Lin Chen; Zixuan Lin; Dengrong Jiang; Jiadi Xu; Peiying Liu; Peter C M van Zijl; Hanzhang Lu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-11-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Yosuke Ishii; Thoralf Thamm; Jia Guo; Mohammad Mehdi Khalighi; Mirwais Wardak; Dawn Holley; Harsh Gandhi; Jun Hyung Park; Bin Shen; Gary K Steinberg; Frederick T Chin; Greg Zaharchuk; Audrey Peiwen Fan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Peiying Liu; Charlamaine Parkinson; Dengrong Jiang; Minhui Ouyang; Jill B De Vis; Frances J Northington; Aylin Tekes; Hao Huang; Thierry A G M Huisman; W Christopher Golden Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Meher R Juttukonda; Chelsea A Lee; Niral J Patel; Larry T Davis; Spencer L Waddle; Melissa C Gindville; Sumit Pruthi; Adetola A Kassim; Michael R DeBaun; Manus J Donahue; Lori C Jordan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Binu P Thomas; Min Sheng; Benjamin Y Tseng; Takashi Tarumi; Kristen Martin-Cook; Kyle B Womack; Munro C Cullum; Benjamin D Levine; Rong Zhang; Hanzhang Lu Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 6.200