Xu Li1,2, Daniel M Harrison3, Hongjun Liu1,2,4, Craig K Jones1,2, Jiwon Oh3, Peter A Calabresi3, Peter C M van Zijl1,2. 1. F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangdong General Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Recent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have revealed heterogeneous magnetic susceptibility contrasts in multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions. Due to its sensitivity to disease-related iron and myelin changes, magnetic susceptibility-based measures may better reflect some pathological features of MS lesions. Hence, we sought to characterize MS lesions using combined R2* mapping and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In all, 306 MS lesions were selected from 24 MS patients who underwent 7T MRI. Maps of R2*, frequency, and quantitative susceptibility were calculated using acquired multiecho gradient echo (GRE) phase data. Lesions were categorized based on their image intensity or their anatomical locations. R2* and susceptibility values were quantified in each lesion based on manually drawn lesion masks and compared between lesion groups showing different contrast patterns. Correlations between R2* and susceptibility were also tested in these lesion groups. RESULTS: In 38% of selected lesions the frequency map did not show the same contrast pattern as the susceptibility map. While most lesions (93%) showed hypointensity on R2*, the susceptibility contrast in lesions varied, with 40% being isointense and 58% being hyperintense in the lesion core. Significant correlations (r = 0.31, P < 0.001) between R2* and susceptibility were found in susceptibility hyperintense lesions, but not in susceptibility isointense lesions. In addition, a higher proportion (74%) of periventricular lesions was found to be susceptibility hyperintense as compared to subcortical (53%) or juxtacortical (38%) lesions. CONCLUSION: Combining R2* and QSM is useful to characterize heterogeneity in MS lesions.
PURPOSE: Recent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have revealed heterogeneous magnetic susceptibility contrasts in multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions. Due to its sensitivity to disease-related iron and myelin changes, magnetic susceptibility-based measures may better reflect some pathological features of MS lesions. Hence, we sought to characterize MS lesions using combined R2* mapping and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In all, 306 MS lesions were selected from 24 MS patients who underwent 7T MRI. Maps of R2*, frequency, and quantitative susceptibility were calculated using acquired multiecho gradient echo (GRE) phase data. Lesions were categorized based on their image intensity or their anatomical locations. R2* and susceptibility values were quantified in each lesion based on manually drawn lesion masks and compared between lesion groups showing different contrast patterns. Correlations between R2* and susceptibility were also tested in these lesion groups. RESULTS: In 38% of selected lesions the frequency map did not show the same contrast pattern as the susceptibility map. While most lesions (93%) showed hypointensity on R2*, the susceptibility contrast in lesions varied, with 40% being isointense and 58% being hyperintense in the lesion core. Significant correlations (r = 0.31, P < 0.001) between R2* and susceptibility were found in susceptibility hyperintense lesions, but not in susceptibility isointense lesions. In addition, a higher proportion (74%) of periventricular lesions was found to be susceptibility hyperintense as compared to subcortical (53%) or juxtacortical (38%) lesions. CONCLUSION: Combining R2* and QSM is useful to characterize heterogeneity in MS lesions.
Authors: Masaki Fukunaga; Tie-Qiang Li; Peter van Gelderen; Jacco A de Zwart; Karin Shmueli; Bing Yao; Jongho Lee; Dragan Maric; Maria A Aronova; Guofeng Zhang; Richard D Leapman; John F Schenck; Hellmut Merkle; Jeff H Duyn Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-02-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Francesca Bagnato; Simon Hametner; Bing Yao; Peter van Gelderen; Hellmut Merkle; Fredric K Cantor; Hans Lassmann; Jeff H Duyn Journal: Brain Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: M Castellaro; R Magliozzi; A Palombit; M Pitteri; E Silvestri; V Camera; S Montemezzi; F B Pizzini; A Bertoldo; R Reynolds; S Monaco; M Calabrese Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Kofi Deh; Gerald D Ponath; Zaki Molvi; Gian-Carlo T Parel; Kelly M Gillen; Shun Zhang; Thanh D Nguyen; Pascal Spincemaille; Yinghua Ma; Ajay Gupta; Susan A Gauthier; David Pitt; Yi Wang Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: S Chawla; I Kister; J Wuerfel; J-C Brisset; S Liu; T Sinnecker; P Dusek; E M Haacke; F Paul; Y Ge Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-03-24 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yi Wang; Pascal Spincemaille; Zhe Liu; Alexey Dimov; Kofi Deh; Jianqi Li; Yan Zhang; Yihao Yao; Kelly M Gillen; Alan H Wilman; Ajay Gupta; Apostolos John Tsiouris; Ilhami Kovanlikaya; Gloria Chia-Yi Chiang; Jonathan W Weinsaft; Lawrence Tanenbaum; Weiwei Chen; Wenzhen Zhu; Shixin Chang; Min Lou; Brian H Kopell; Michael G Kaplitt; David Devos; Toshinori Hirai; Xuemei Huang; Yukunori Korogi; Alexander Shtilbans; Geon-Ho Jahng; Daniel Pelletier; Susan A Gauthier; David Pitt; Ashley I Bush; Gary M Brittenham; Martin R Prince Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 4.813