Maiken K Brix1,2, Lars Ersland3,4, Kenneth Hugdahl1,4,5,6, Gerard E Dwyer5, Renate Grüner1,4,7, Ralph Noeske8, Mona K Beyer9,10, Alexander R Craven4,5. 1. Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway. 2. Department of Clinical Medicine (K1), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 3. Department of Clinical Engineering, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway. 4. NORMENT - Norwegian Center for Mental Disorders Research, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 5. Department of Biological and Medical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 6. Division of Psychiatry, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway. 7. Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 8. MR Applications and Workflow Development, GE Healthcare, Berlin, Germany. 9. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 10. Department of Life Sciences and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The reproducibility of the MEGA-PRESS (MEshcher-GArwood Point RESolved Spectroscopy) MR spectroscopy sequence for the measurement of gamma- aminobutyric acid (GABA) is addressed, focusing on optimizing the number of repetitions at two voxel locations in the human brain and associated possibilities in analysis tools. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two 20-min MEGA-PRESS acquisitions were run (echo time = 68 ms, repetition time = 1800 ms, repetitions = 328): one from a 21 mL volume in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and one from a 22 mL volume in the left Broca's area in 21 healthy male volunteers (age 32 years ± 6[SD]). Subjects were scanned twice with identical protocols, 1 week apart. Data were acquired on a 3 Tesla GE Discovery 750 scanner using a 32-channel head coil. Spectroscopy data were partitioned into shorter epochs, numerically equivalent to scans of progressively increasing duration, and compared both within and between sessions. Three different analysis schemes were applied: (1) Vendor prototype preprocessor, with quantification by LCModel. (2) Pure Gannet pipeline. (3) Preprocessing with Gannet, and quantification with LCModel. The coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated as a measure of reproducibility. RESULTS: Increasing the number of repetitions showed improvements for within- and between-session reproducibility up to around 218 repetitions. (CV ranging from 4 to 14%). Gannet combined with LCModel approach proved the best method. (CV = 4-5%). Measurements from the ACC area had higher CVs than the Broca area. (CV = 6-14% versus 4-7%). CONCLUSION: Measurement in the Broca area yields better reproducibility than the ACC. With appropriate acquisition times and preprocessing tools, measurements from the ACC area are also reliable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;46:421-430.
PURPOSE: The reproducibility of the MEGA-PRESS (MEshcher-GArwood Point RESolved Spectroscopy) MR spectroscopy sequence for the measurement of gamma- aminobutyric acid (GABA) is addressed, focusing on optimizing the number of repetitions at two voxel locations in the human brain and associated possibilities in analysis tools. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two 20-min MEGA-PRESS acquisitions were run (echo time = 68 ms, repetition time = 1800 ms, repetitions = 328): one from a 21 mL volume in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and one from a 22 mL volume in the left Broca's area in 21 healthy male volunteers (age 32 years ± 6[SD]). Subjects were scanned twice with identical protocols, 1 week apart. Data were acquired on a 3 Tesla GE Discovery 750 scanner using a 32-channel head coil. Spectroscopy data were partitioned into shorter epochs, numerically equivalent to scans of progressively increasing duration, and compared both within and between sessions. Three different analysis schemes were applied: (1) Vendor prototype preprocessor, with quantification by LCModel. (2) Pure Gannet pipeline. (3) Preprocessing with Gannet, and quantification with LCModel. The coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated as a measure of reproducibility. RESULTS: Increasing the number of repetitions showed improvements for within- and between-session reproducibility up to around 218 repetitions. (CV ranging from 4 to 14%). Gannet combined with LCModel approach proved the best method. (CV = 4-5%). Measurements from the ACC area had higher CVs than the Broca area. (CV = 6-14% versus 4-7%). CONCLUSION: Measurement in the Broca area yields better reproducibility than the ACC. With appropriate acquisition times and preprocessing tools, measurements from the ACC area are also reliable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;46:421-430.
Authors: Mark Mikkelsen; Peter B Barker; Pallab K Bhattacharyya; Maiken K Brix; Pieter F Buur; Kim M Cecil; Kimberly L Chan; David Y-T Chen; Alexander R Craven; Koen Cuypers; Michael Dacko; Niall W Duncan; Ulrike Dydak; David A Edmondson; Gabriele Ende; Lars Ersland; Fei Gao; Ian Greenhouse; Ashley D Harris; Naying He; Stefanie Heba; Nigel Hoggard; Tun-Wei Hsu; Jacobus F A Jansen; Alayar Kangarlu; Thomas Lange; R Marc Lebel; Yan Li; Chien-Yuan E Lin; Jy-Kang Liou; Jiing-Feng Lirng; Feng Liu; Ruoyun Ma; Celine Maes; Marta Moreno-Ortega; Scott O Murray; Sean Noah; Ralph Noeske; Michael D Noseworthy; Georg Oeltzschner; James J Prisciandaro; Nicolaas A J Puts; Timothy P L Roberts; Markus Sack; Napapon Sailasuta; Muhammad G Saleh; Michael-Paul Schallmo; Nicholas Simard; Stephan P Swinnen; Martin Tegenthoff; Peter Truong; Guangbin Wang; Iain D Wilkinson; Hans-Jörg Wittsack; Hongmin Xu; Fuhua Yan; Chencheng Zhang; Vadim Zipunnikov; Helge J Zöllner; Richard A E Edden Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Yue Zhang; Edward Taub; Nouha Salibi; Gitendra Uswatte; Andrew A Maudsley; Sulaiman Sheriff; Brent Womble; Victor W Mark; David C Knight Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Muhammad G Saleh; Daniel Rimbault; Mark Mikkelsen; Georg Oeltzschner; Anna M Wang; Dengrong Jiang; Ali Alhamud; Jamie Near; Michael Schär; Ralph Noeske; James B Murdoch; Lars Ersland; Alexander R Craven; Gerard Eric Dwyer; Eli Renate Grüner; Li Pan; Sinyeob Ahn; Richard A E Edden Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: James P Coxon; Robin F H Cash; Joshua J Hendrikse; Nigel C Rogasch; Ellen Stavrinos; Chao Suo; Murat Yücel Journal: J Physiol Date: 2017-12-27 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Lawrence K Fung; Ryan E Flores; Meng Gu; Kevin L Sun; David James; Rachel K Schuck; Booil Jo; Jun Hyung Park; Byung Chul Lee; Jae Ho Jung; Sang Eun Kim; Manish Saggar; Matthew D Sacchet; Geoff Warnock; Mohammad Mehdi Khalighi; Daniel Spielman; Frederick T Chin; Antonio Y Hardan Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2020-05-06 Impact factor: 15.992
Authors: Alexander R Craven; Pallab K Bhattacharyya; William T Clarke; Ulrike Dydak; Richard A E Edden; Lars Ersland; Pravat K Mandal; Mark Mikkelsen; James B Murdoch; Jamie Near; Reuben Rideaux; Deepika Shukla; Min Wang; Martin Wilson; Helge J Zöllner; Kenneth Hugdahl; Georg Oeltzschner Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 4.478
Authors: Jessica M Duda; Amelia D Moser; Chun S Zuo; Fei Du; Xi Chen; Sarah Perlo; Christine E Richards; Nara Nascimento; Maria Ironside; David J Crowley; Laura M Holsen; Madhusmita Misra; James I Hudson; Jill M Goldstein; Diego A Pizzagalli Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-11-20 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Mark Mikkelsen; Rachelle S Loo; Nicolaas A J Puts; Richard A E Edden; Ashley D Harris Journal: J Neurosci Methods Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 2.987
Authors: Yan Li; Wei Bian; Peder Larson; Jason C Crane; Prasanna Parvathaneni; Srikantan Nagarajan; Sarah J Nelson Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2017-10-25 Impact factor: 3.169