2000
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1492(200002)13:1<28::aid-nbm606>3.0.co;2-l
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the reliability of quantitative clinical magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the human brain

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
60
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 140 publications
(74 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
8
60
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In all of these studies the concentrations of the other metabolites remained constant with time to within experimental error, as would be expected. Detailed studies 3,7,8 of intra-assay and inter-assay reproducibility with LCModel are discussed below.…”
Section: Results and Discussion Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In all of these studies the concentrations of the other metabolites remained constant with time to within experimental error, as would be expected. Detailed studies 3,7,8 of intra-assay and inter-assay reproducibility with LCModel are discussed below.…”
Section: Results and Discussion Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 2 shows a relatively high-quality spectrum from normal human gray matter (at 2.0 T with STEAM, TE/ TM/TR = 20/30/3000 ms, 128 scans and 18 mL volume). Even at lower resolution, the reproducibilities of LCModel estimates at 2.0 T 1,4 and 1.5 T 3,8 indicate that a considerable number of metabolites can be reliably estimated. Figure 3 shows an unusually low-resolution spectrum (from abnormal human gray matter in vivo at 2.0 T with STEAM, TE/TM/TR = 20/30/3000.…”
Section: Baselinementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, we cannot be completely sure about the reproducibility of our measurements. Other studies suggest that reproducibility of 1 H-MRS (Schirmer and Auer, 2000), DTI (Brockstedt et al, 1999;Cassol et al, 2004) and PWI (Henry et al, 2001) is good, although this might depend on the scanner, the scan protocol, and post-processing procedures. ROIs were drawn in the spatially normalized MNI brain template, which may have introduced additional variance due to inherent variations in mapping of individual brains to the MNI brain.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, Venkatraman et al 124 compared the precision (reproducibility) and variability of singlevoxel PRESS data collected from the anterior cingulate and hippocampus at 4.0 T with reproducibility (single subject scanned multiple times) [125][126][127][128][129][130][131][132][133] and variability studies (many subjects scanned at least once) 109,115,120,128 -130,134 -144 from the literature (many different regions of the brain). The motivation for the Venkatraman study was the review of Steen et al, 145 who found an average coefficient of variation (CV, % ϭ SD/mean ϫ 100) for NAA by Steen et al 145 in the frontal lobe in healthy controls of 13.7% at 1.5 T (from 16 published studies).…”
Section: Reproducibility Of Mrs Studies Of Normal Controlsmentioning
confidence: 99%