Steffen Goerke1, Yannick Soehngen1,2, Anagha Deshmane3, Moritz Zaiss3, Johannes Breitling1,2,4, Philip S Boyd1,2, Kai Herz3, Ferdinand Zimmermann1,2, Karel D Klika5, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer6,7, Daniel Paech6, Mark E Ladd1,2,7, Peter Bachert1,2. 1. Division of Medical Physics in Radiology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 2. Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Department of High-Field Magnetic Resonance, Max-Planck-Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany. 4. Max-Planck-Institute for Nuclear Physics, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Molecular Structure Analysis, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 6. Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 7. Faculty of Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Relaxation-compensated CEST-MRI (i.e., the inverse metrics magnetization transfer ratio and apparent exchange-dependent relaxation) has already been shown to provide valuable information for brain tumor diagnosis at ultrahigh magnetic field strengths. This study aims at translating the established acquisition protocol at 7 T to a clinically relevant magnetic field strength of 3 T. METHODS: Protein model solutions were analyzed at multiple magnetic field strengths to assess the spectral widths of the amide proton transfer and relayed nuclear Overhauser effect (rNOE) signals at 3 T. This prior knowledge of the spectral range of CEST signals enabled a reliable and stable Lorentzian-fitting also at 3 T where distinct peaks are no longer resolved in the Z-spectrum. In comparison to the established acquisition protocol at 7 T, also the image readout was extended to three dimensions. RESULTS: The observed spectral range of CEST signals at 3 T was approximately ±15 ppm. Final relaxation-compensated amide proton transfer and relayed nuclear Overhauser effect contrasts were in line with previous results at 7 T. Examination of a patient with glioblastoma demonstrated the applicability of this acquisition protocol in a clinical setting. CONCLUSION: The presented acquisition protocol allows relaxation-compensated CEST-MRI at 3 T with a 3D coverage of the human brain. Translation to a clinically relevant magnetic field strength of 3 T opens the door to trials with a large number of participants, thus enabling a comprehensive assessment of the clinical relevance of relaxation compensation in CEST-MRI.
PURPOSE: Relaxation-compensated CEST-MRI (i.e., the inverse metrics magnetization transfer ratio and apparent exchange-dependent relaxation) has already been shown to provide valuable information for brain tumor diagnosis at ultrahigh magnetic field strengths. This study aims at translating the established acquisition protocol at 7 T to a clinically relevant magnetic field strength of 3 T. METHODS: Protein model solutions were analyzed at multiple magnetic field strengths to assess the spectral widths of the amide proton transfer and relayed nuclear Overhauser effect (rNOE) signals at 3 T. This prior knowledge of the spectral range of CEST signals enabled a reliable and stable Lorentzian-fitting also at 3 T where distinct peaks are no longer resolved in the Z-spectrum. In comparison to the established acquisition protocol at 7 T, also the image readout was extended to three dimensions. RESULTS: The observed spectral range of CEST signals at 3 T was approximately ±15 ppm. Final relaxation-compensated amide proton transfer and relayed nuclear Overhauser effect contrasts were in line with previous results at 7 T. Examination of a patient with glioblastoma demonstrated the applicability of this acquisition protocol in a clinical setting. CONCLUSION: The presented acquisition protocol allows relaxation-compensated CEST-MRI at 3 T with a 3D coverage of the human brain. Translation to a clinically relevant magnetic field strength of 3 T opens the door to trials with a large number of participants, thus enabling a comprehensive assessment of the clinical relevance of relaxation compensation in CEST-MRI.
Authors: Vittorio Stumpo; Martina Sebök; Christiaan Hendrik Bas van Niftrik; Katharina Seystahl; Nicolin Hainc; Zsolt Kulcsar; Michael Weller; Luca Regli; Jorn Fierstra Journal: MAGMA Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Ran Sui; Lin Chen; Yuguo Li; Jianpan Huang; Kannie W Y Chan; Xiang Xu; Peter C M van Zijl; Jiadi Xu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-03-27 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Dennis Kleimaier; Steffen Goerke; Cordula Nies; Moritz Zaiss; Patrick Kunz; Peter Bachert; Mark E Ladd; Eric Gottwald; Lothar R Schad Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 4.379