2016
DOI: 10.1007/s10334-016-0567-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MRI using phase-based venous output functions: comparison with pseudo-continuous arterial spin labelling and assessment of contrast agent concentration in large veins

Abstract: Susceptibility-induced phase shifts and pixel shifts are potentially useful for large-vein CA quantification. Previous predictions of a higher R2*-relaxivity in tissue than in blood were supported.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

3
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The good correlation between Δ R 2* and [CA] was, in itself, an encouraging observation, and the estimated T 2* relaxivity of 85 mM −1 s −1 in this study was in very good agreement with the simulations by Kjølby et al, predicting a tissue T 2* relaxivity of 87 mM −1 s −1 at 3T [ 1 ]. However, the present tissue T 2* relaxivity estimate was higher than in a previous experimental study of in vivo relaxivity, based on a comparison with cerebral blood flow (CBF) values from a reference arterial spin labelling (ASL) method, where the T 2* relaxivity was estimated to be 32 mM −1 s −1 [ 41 ].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 66%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The good correlation between Δ R 2* and [CA] was, in itself, an encouraging observation, and the estimated T 2* relaxivity of 85 mM −1 s −1 in this study was in very good agreement with the simulations by Kjølby et al, predicting a tissue T 2* relaxivity of 87 mM −1 s −1 at 3T [ 1 ]. However, the present tissue T 2* relaxivity estimate was higher than in a previous experimental study of in vivo relaxivity, based on a comparison with cerebral blood flow (CBF) values from a reference arterial spin labelling (ASL) method, where the T 2* relaxivity was estimated to be 32 mM −1 s −1 [ 41 ].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 66%
“… The expected theoretical values are based on an assumed concentration range of 5–10 mM at peak concentration in blood [ 36 ] and a peak-to-tail concentration ratio of 9 [ 41 ]. For WM and GM concentrations, the relation between blood and tissue is based on Eq.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kjølby et al ( 2 ) used simulations to calculate an r2* value of 44 mM −1 s −1 at 1.5 T and 87 mM −1 s −1 at 3 T, that is, indicating a substantial linear field-strength dependence of the tissue relaxivity. Wirestam et al ( 19 ) estimated the in vivo R 2 * relaxivity at 3 T to be ∼32 mM −1 s −1 , based on a comparison with a reference arterial spin labeling CBF method. In two studies investigating oxygenated whole-blood relaxivity ( 20 , 21 ), a nonlinear relationship was observed between the concentration C and ΔR 2 *, contrary to the linear ΔR 2 *-versus-C relationship found typically in tissue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such a multi-study design to maximize the scientific benefit was a prerequisite for obtaining approval by the local ethics committee. Hence, parts of the acquired image data have previously been analyzed for other purposes with clearly separated hypotheses and post-processing approaches [ 12 , 20 23 ], and in the present study additional and independent image processing and analysis was performed to address new scientific issues.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%