Muhammad G Saleh1,2, Mark Mikkelsen1,2, Georg Oeltzschner1,2, Kimberly L Chan1,2,3, Adam Berrington1,2, Peter B Barker1,2, Richard A E Edden1,2. 1. Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To demonstrate simultaneous editing of the two most commonly edited and overlapping signals, γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), and glutathione (GSH), with Hadamard encoding and reconstruction of MEGA-edited spectroscopy (HERMES) using sLASER localization at 7T. METHODS: Density matrix simulations of HERMES at 7T were carried out and compared with phantom experiments. Additional phantom experiments were performed to characterize the echo time (TE) -dependent modulation of GABA- and GSH-edited HERMES spectra at TE of 80-160 ms. In vivo experiments were performed in 10 healthy volunteers, comparing HERMES (11 min) to sequentially acquired MEGA-sLASER detection of GABA and GSH (2 × 11 min). RESULTS: Simulations of HERMES show GABA- and GSH-edited spectra with negligible levels of crosstalk, and give modest agreement with phantom spectra. The TE series of GABA- and GSH-edited HERMES spectra modulate as a result of T2 relaxation and coupling evolution, with GABA showing a stronger TE-dependence. In vivo HERMES experiments show well-edited GABA and GSH signals. Measured concentrations are not statistically different between HERMES and MEGA-sLASER for GABA (1. 051 ± 0.254 i.u. and 1.053 ± 0.248 i.u; P > 0.985) or GSH (0.300 ± 0.091 i.u. and 0.302 ± 0.093 i.u; P > 0.940). CONCLUSION: Simulated, phantom and in vivo measurements of HERMES show excellent segregation of GABA- and GSH-edited signals, and excellent agreement with separately acquired MEGA-sLASER data. HERMES allows two-fold acceleration of editing while maintaining spectral quality compared with sequentially acquired MEGA-sLASER measurements. Magn Reson Med 80:474-479, 2018.
PURPOSE: To demonstrate simultaneous editing of the two most commonly edited and overlapping signals, γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), and glutathione (GSH), with Hadamard encoding and reconstruction of MEGA-edited spectroscopy (HERMES) using sLASER localization at 7T. METHODS: Density matrix simulations of HERMES at 7T were carried out and compared with phantom experiments. Additional phantom experiments were performed to characterize the echo time (TE) -dependent modulation of GABA- and GSH-edited HERMES spectra at TE of 80-160 ms. In vivo experiments were performed in 10 healthy volunteers, comparing HERMES (11 min) to sequentially acquired MEGA-sLASER detection of GABA and GSH (2 × 11 min). RESULTS: Simulations of HERMES show GABA- and GSH-edited spectra with negligible levels of crosstalk, and give modest agreement with phantom spectra. The TE series of GABA- and GSH-edited HERMES spectra modulate as a result of T2 relaxation and coupling evolution, with GABA showing a stronger TE-dependence. In vivo HERMES experiments show well-edited GABA and GSH signals. Measured concentrations are not statistically different between HERMES and MEGA-sLASER for GABA (1. 051 ± 0.254 i.u. and 1.053 ± 0.248 i.u; P > 0.985) or GSH (0.300 ± 0.091 i.u. and 0.302 ± 0.093 i.u; P > 0.940). CONCLUSION: Simulated, phantom and in vivo measurements of HERMES show excellent segregation of GABA- and GSH-edited signals, and excellent agreement with separately acquired MEGA-sLASER data. HERMES allows two-fold acceleration of editing while maintaining spectral quality compared with sequentially acquired MEGA-sLASER measurements. Magn Reson Med 80:474-479, 2018.
Authors: Kimberly L Chan; Nicolaas A J Puts; Michael Schär; Peter B Barker; Richard A E Edden Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2016-04-19 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Richard A E Edden; Georg Oeltzschner; Ashley D Harris; Nicolaas A J Puts; Kimberly L Chan; Vincent O Boer; Michael Schär; Peter B Barker Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-05-30 Impact factor: 4.813
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: M G Saleh; A Papantoni; M Mikkelsen; S C N Hui; G Oeltzschner; N A Puts; R A E Edden; S Carnell Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-05-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yury Koush; Douglas L Rothman; Kevin L Behar; Robin A de Graaf; Fahmeed Hyder Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2022-01-26 Impact factor: 6.960
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: Tao Gong; Xia Zhang; Xinhong Wei; Shuhui Yuan; Muhammad G Saleh; Yulu Song; Richard A Edden; Guangbin Wang Journal: Neurochem Int Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 3.921
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
Authors: Muhammad G Saleh; Min Wang; Mark Mikkelsen; Steve C N Hui; Georg Oeltzschner; Jeff Boissoneault; Bethany Stennett; Richard A E Edden; Eric C Porges Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: In-Young Choi; Ovidiu C Andronesi; Peter Barker; Wolfgang Bogner; Richard A E Edden; Lana G Kaiser; Phil Lee; Małgorzata Marjańska; Melissa Terpstra; Robin A de Graaf Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-09-18 Impact factor: 4.044