2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118399
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigating the effect of flow compensation and quantitative susceptibility mapping method on the accuracy of venous susceptibility measurement

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

5
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, WM venous density is a less direct approach to quantitatively describe the susceptibility difference in the veins compared to quantitative susceptibility map (QSM), which would yield venous susceptibility value. However, reconstruction of venous susceptibility QSM has yet been standardized in clinical applications, which still requires optimization in the data processing pipeline for quantitative accuracy ( Berg et al, 2021 ). The major difficulty in using QSM is the partial volume effect of small veins which makes oxygen saturation quantification suspect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, WM venous density is a less direct approach to quantitatively describe the susceptibility difference in the veins compared to quantitative susceptibility map (QSM), which would yield venous susceptibility value. However, reconstruction of venous susceptibility QSM has yet been standardized in clinical applications, which still requires optimization in the data processing pipeline for quantitative accuracy ( Berg et al, 2021 ). The major difficulty in using QSM is the partial volume effect of small veins which makes oxygen saturation quantification suspect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our control group (i.e., Australian footballers with a similar self-reported HoC but no recently diagnosed SRC in the past three months) is arguably the most clinically relevant in terms of assessing whether the proposed MRI biomarkers are sensitive to sub-acute SRC changes in this population; however future larger scale studies would benefit from also including control groups without a HoC and without a history of collision sport participation to provide insights into the impact of these variables. Susceptibility quantification can be confounded by partial volume effects on vessels from surrounding brain tissue, flow acceleration effects and the choice of QSM processing pipeline [ 32 ]. To best control for partial volume effects, we measured susceptibility over global gray and white matter segmentations based on a stability mask of reliable control values.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also measured SvO 2 in the straight sinus, a large vessel approximately 5 mm in diameter [ 33 ], using maximum intensity projection images (MIPs). Furthermore, QSM images were reconstructed using nonlinear dipole inversion with Tikhonov regularization which has been shown to provide more accurate quantification of venous susceptibility than other methods [ 32 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the straight sinus being far away from the edge of the brain mask, the estimates of Y v in the straight sinus were even higher than in the SSS in our study. This may have been caused by partial volume effects in this venous structure, which is smaller than the SSS and more challenging to accurately segment, or could have been due to the use of L1 regularization in the χ map calculation which is known to underestimate venous χ ( Berg et al, 2021 ). The choice of susceptibility calculation method has been shown to have a significant effect on estimates of Y v, with Tikhonov-based regularization, as used in this study, shown to be the most accurate method for venous susceptibility measurement in a recent study ( Berg et al, 2021 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%