Timothy J Colgan1,2, Gesine Knobloch1, Scott B Reeder1,2,3,4,5, Diego Hernando1,2. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 2. Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Determine the impact of the microscopic spatial distribution of iron on relaxometry and susceptibility-based estimates of iron concentration. METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations and in vitro experiments of erythrocytes were used to create different microscopic distributions of iron. Measuring iron with intact erythrocyte cells created a heterogeneous distribution of iron, whereas lysing erythrocytes was used to create a homogeneous distribution of iron. Multi-echo spin echo and spoiled gradient echo acquisitions were then used to estimate relaxation parameters ( R 2 and R 2 * ) and susceptibility. RESULTS: Simulations demonstrate that R 2 and R 2 * measurements depend on the spatial distribution of iron even for the same iron concentration and volume susceptibility. Similarly, in vitro experiments demonstrate that R 2 and R 2 * measurements depend on the microscopic spatial distribution of iron whereas the quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) susceptibility estimates reflect iron concentration without sensitivity to spatial distribution. CONCLUSIONS: R 2 and R 2 * for iron quantification depend on the spatial distribution or iron. QSM-based estimation of iron concentration is insensitive to the microscopic spatial distribution of iron, potentially providing a distribution independent measure of iron concentration.
PURPOSE: Determine the impact of the microscopic spatial distribution of iron on relaxometry and susceptibility-based estimates of iron concentration. METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations and in vitro experiments of erythrocytes were used to create different microscopic distributions of iron. Measuring iron with intact erythrocyte cells created a heterogeneous distribution of iron, whereas lysing erythrocytes was used to create a homogeneous distribution of iron. Multi-echo spin echo and spoiled gradient echo acquisitions were then used to estimate relaxation parameters ( R 2 and R 2 * ) and susceptibility. RESULTS: Simulations demonstrate that R 2 and R 2 * measurements depend on the spatial distribution of iron even for the same iron concentration and volume susceptibility. Similarly, in vitro experiments demonstrate that R 2 and R 2 * measurements depend on the microscopic spatial distribution of iron whereas the quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) susceptibility estimates reflect iron concentration without sensitivity to spatial distribution. CONCLUSIONS:R 2 and R 2 * for iron quantification depend on the spatial distribution or iron. QSM-based estimation of iron concentration is insensitive to the microscopic spatial distribution of iron, potentially providing a distribution independent measure of iron concentration.
Authors: Achim H Kaim; Thorsten Wischer; Terence O'Reilly; Gernot Jundt; Johannes Fröhlich; Gustav K von Schulthess; Peter R Allegrini Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jane S Hankins; M Beth McCarville; Ralf B Loeffler; Matthew P Smeltzer; Mihaela Onciu; Fredric A Hoffer; Chin-Shang Li; Winfred C Wang; Russell E Ware; Claudia M Hillenbrand Journal: Blood Date: 2009-03-04 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Christian Langkammer; Ferdinand Schweser; Karin Shmueli; Christian Kames; Xu Li; Li Guo; Carlos Milovic; Jinsuh Kim; Hongjiang Wei; Kristian Bredies; Sagar Buch; Yihao Guo; Zhe Liu; Jakob Meineke; Alexander Rauscher; José P Marques; Berkin Bilgic Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-07-31 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Nina F Schwenzer; Jürgen Machann; Michael M Haap; Petros Martirosian; Christina Schraml; Gerd Liebig; Norbert Stefan; Hans-Ulrich Häring; Claus D Claussen; Andreas Fritsche; Fritz Schick Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: John P Bullivant; Shan Zhao; Brad J Willenberg; Bettina Kozissnik; Christopher D Batich; Jon Dobson Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Ante Zhu; Scott B Reeder; Kevin M Johnson; Sydney M Nguyen; Sean B Fain; Ian M Bird; Thaddeus G Golos; Oliver Wieben; Dinesh M Shah; Diego Hernando Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Danielle A Simmons; Brian D Mills; Robert R Butler Iii; Jason Kuan; Tyne L M McHugh; Carolyn Akers; James Zhou; Wassim Syriani; Maged Grouban; Michael Zeineh; Frank M Longo Journal: Neurotherapeutics Date: 2021-03-30 Impact factor: 7.620