Signal-to-noise ratio effects in quantitative cerebral perfusion using dynamic susceptibility contrast agents

Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

Volumn 49, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 122-128

  Smith, Michael R ^a   Lu, Hong ^a,b   Frayne, Richard ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^b FOOTHILLS HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Blood flow; Magnetic resonance imaging perfusion studies; Optimum experimental parameter selection; Optimum signal to noise ratio; SVD deconvolution

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING; BLOOD; HEMODYNAMICS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; TISSUE;

BLOOD FLOW; DYNAMIC SUSCEPTIBILITY CONTRAST; EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS; EXPERIMENTAL PARAMETERS; NON-LINEAR RELATIONSHIPS; OPTIMUM SIGNALS; PERFUSION STUDIES; SINGULAR VALUED DECOMPOSITIONS;

SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO;

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ACCURACY; ARTERY; ARTICLE; BLOOD FLOW; BRAIN PERFUSION; DECOMPOSITION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; TIME;

EID: 0037225903     PISSN: 07403194     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.10330     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Østergaard L, Weisskoff RM, Chesler DA, Gyldensted C, Rosen BR. High resolution measurement of cerebral blood flow using intravacular tracer bolus passages. Part 1: Mathematical approach and statistical analysis. Magn Reson Med 1996:36:715-725.
2. Østergaard L, Weisskoff RM, Chesler DA, Gyldensted C. Rosen BR. High resolution measurement of cerebral blood flow using intravacular tracer bolus passages. Part 2: Experimental comparison and preliminary results. Magn Reson Med 1996:36:726-736.
3. Wall C III, Borovetz HS, Murphy JJ, Hardesty RL. System parameter identification in transport models using the fast Fourier transform (FFT), Comput Biomed Res 1981:14:570-581.
4. Gobbel GT, Fike JR. A deconvolution method for evaluating indicatordilution curves, Phys Med Biol 1994:39:1833-1854.
5. Rempp KA, Brix G. Wenz F, Becker CR, Guckel F, Lorenz WJ. Quantification of regional cerebral blood flow and volume with dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1994:193:647-641.
6. Nichols ST, Smith MR, Salami MJE. Application of ARMA modelling to multicomponent signals. In: Proceedings of the 7th IFAC/IFORS Symposium, York, UK, 1985. p 1473-1478.
7. Vonken EPA, Beekman FJ, Barker CJG, Viergever MA. Maximum likelihood estimation of cerebral blood flow in dynamic susceptibility contrast MR. Magn Reson Med 1999:41:343-350.
8. Wirestam R. Andersson L, Østergaard L, Bolling M, Aunola J, Lindgren A, Geijer B. Holtas S, Stahlberg F. Assessment of regional cerebral blood flow by dynamic susceptibility contrast MR using different deconvolution techniques. Magn Reson Med 2000:13:691-700.
9. Henkelman RM. Measurement of signal intensities in the presence of noise in MR images, Med Phys 1985:12:232-233.
10. Henkelman RM. Erratum: Measurement of signal intensities in the presence of noise in MR images. Med Phys 1986:13:544.
11. McGibney G, Smith MR. An unbiased signal to noise measure for magnetic resonance images. Med Phys 1993:20.4;1077-1078.
12. Frayne R, Omary RA, Unal A, Strother CM. Inter-arterial contrast-enhnaced MRA: Role of injection rate and injection concentrations. J Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2000;11:1277-1284.
13. Parker DL, Goodrich KC, Alexander AL, Buswell HR, Blatter DD, Tsurada JS. Optimized visualization of vessels in contrast enhanced intracranial MR angiography. Magn Reson Med 1998;40:873-882.
14. Harris FJ. On the use of windows for harmonic analysis with the discrete Fourier transform. Proc IEEE 1978;66:51-84.
15. Calamante F, Gadian DG. Connelly A. Delay and dispersion effects in dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI: Simulations using singular value decomposition. Magn Reson Med 2000:44:466-473.
16. Wu O, Østergaard L, Benner T, Rosens B, Weisskoff R, Sorenson A. Perfusion calculations using singular value decomposition are biased by arrival timing. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Honolulu, 2000. p 660.