Kimberly L Chan1,2, Nicolaas A J Puts2,3, Karim Snoussi2,3, Ashley D Harris2,3, Peter B Barker2,3, Richard A E Edden2,3. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. F. M. Kirby Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 3. Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the echo time (TE) dependence of J-difference editing of glutathione and to determine the optimal TE for in vivo measurements at 3T. METHODS: Spatially resolved density-matrix simulations and phantom experiments were performed at a range of TEs to establish the spatial and TE modulation of glutathione signals in editing-on, editing-off, and difference spectra at 3T. In vivo data were acquired in five healthy subjects to compare a TE of 68 ms and a TE of 120 ms. At the longer TE, high-bandwidth, frequency-modulated, slice-selective refocusing pulses were also compared with conventional amplitude-modulated pulses. RESULTS: Simulations and relaxation-corrected phantom experiments suggest that the maximum edited signal occurs at TE 160 ms, ignoring transverse relaxation. Considering in vivo T2 relaxation times of 67-89 ms, the optimal in vivo TE is estimated to be 120 ms. In vivo measurements showed that this TE yielded 15% more signal than TE 68 ms. A further gain of 57% resulted from using improved slice-selective refocusing pulses. CONCLUSION: J-difference editing of glutathione using TE 120 ms delivers increased signal due to improved editing efficiency that more than offsets T2 losses. The additional TE also allows for use of improved slice-selective refocusing pulses, which results in additional signal gains. Magn Reson Med 77:498-504, 2017.
PURPOSE: To investigate the echo time (TE) dependence of J-difference editing of glutathione and to determine the optimal TE for in vivo measurements at 3T. METHODS: Spatially resolved density-matrix simulations and phantom experiments were performed at a range of TEs to establish the spatial and TE modulation of glutathione signals in editing-on, editing-off, and difference spectra at 3T. In vivo data were acquired in five healthy subjects to compare a TE of 68 ms and a TE of 120 ms. At the longer TE, high-bandwidth, frequency-modulated, slice-selective refocusing pulses were also compared with conventional amplitude-modulated pulses. RESULTS: Simulations and relaxation-corrected phantom experiments suggest that the maximum edited signal occurs at TE 160 ms, ignoring transverse relaxation. Considering in vivo T2 relaxation times of 67-89 ms, the optimal in vivo TE is estimated to be 120 ms. In vivo measurements showed that this TE yielded 15% more signal than TE 68 ms. A further gain of 57% resulted from using improved slice-selective refocusing pulses. CONCLUSION: J-difference editing of glutathione using TE 120 ms delivers increased signal due to improved editing efficiency that more than offsets T2 losses. The additional TE also allows for use of improved slice-selective refocusing pulses, which results in additional signal gains. Magn Reson Med 77:498-504, 2017.
Authors: N Weiduschat; X Mao; J Hupf; N Armstrong; G Kang; D J Lange; H Mitsumoto; D C Shungu Journal: Neurosci Lett Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: René Gysin; Rudolf Kraftsik; Julie Sandell; Pierre Bovet; Céline Chappuis; Philippe Conus; Patricia Deppen; Martin Preisig; Viviane Ruiz; Pascal Steullet; Mirjana Tosic; Thomas Werge; Michel Cuénod; Kim Q Do Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-10-05 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: S Andrea Wijtenburg; Jamie Near; Stephanie A Korenic; Frank E Gaston; Hongji Chen; Mark Mikkelsen; Shuo Chen; Peter Kochunov; L Elliot Hong; Laura M Rowland Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-04-16 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Muhammad G Saleh; Mark Mikkelsen; Georg Oeltzschner; Kimberly L Chan; Adam Berrington; Peter B Barker; Richard A E Edden Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Muhammad G Saleh; Georg Oeltzschner; Kimberly L Chan; Nicolaas A J Puts; Mark Mikkelsen; Michael Schär; Ashley D Harris; Richard A E Edden Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-08-14 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Kimberly L Chan; Georg Oeltzschner; Muhammad G Saleh; Richard A E Edden; Peter B Barker Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kimberly L Chan; Georg Oeltzschner; Michael Schär; Peter B Barker; Richard A E Edden Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Kimberly L Chan; Muhammad G Saleh; Georg Oeltzschner; Peter B Barker; Richard A E Edden Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Georg Oeltzschner; Muhammad G Saleh; Daniel Rimbault; Mark Mikkelsen; Kimberly L Chan; Nicolaas A J Puts; Richard A E Edden Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2018-10-06 Impact factor: 6.556