Partial volume effects on aterial input functions: Shape and amplitude distortions and their correction

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 22, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 704-709

  Van Osch, Matthias J P ^a,b   Van Der Grond, Jeroen ^a,b   Bakker, Chris J G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Arterial input function; Cerebral perfusion; Contrast agents; Dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI; Partial volume effects

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ACCURACY; ARTERIAL INPUT FUNCTION; BLOOD LEVEL; BRAIN BLOOD FLOW; BRAIN PERFUSION; CALIBRATION; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; MAGNETIC FIELD; MEASUREMENT; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARAMETER; PARTIAL VOLUME EFFECT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SIGNAL DETECTION; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; THEORETICAL MODEL; TISSUE LEVEL;

ARTERIES; CEREBROVASCULAR CIRCULATION; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MODELS, THEORETICAL;

EID: 28444440892     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20455     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. Sorensen AG, Reimer P. Perfusion imaging: principles and current applications. Stuttgart, Germany: Georg Thieme Verlag; 2000. p 1-56.
2. Akbudak E, Conturo TE. Arterial input functions from MR phase imaging. Magn Reson Med 1996;36:809-815.
3. Boxerman JL, Hamberg LM, Rosen BR, Weisskoff RM. MR contrast due to intravascular magnetic susceptibility perturbations. Magn Reson Med 1995;34:555-566.
4. Simonsen CZ, Ostergaard L, Smith DF, Vestergaard-Poulsen P, Gyldensted C. Comparison of gradient- and spin-echo imaging: CBF, CBV, and MTT measurements by bolus tracking. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:411-416.
5. Kiselev VG. On the theoretical basis of perfusion measurements by dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI. Magn Reson Med 2001;46: 1113-1122.
6. Akbudak E, Hsu RM, Li Y, Conturo TE. Delta R2* and Delta phi contrast agent perfusion effects in blood: quantitation and linearity assessment. In: Proceedings of the 6th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Sydney, Australia, 1998. Abstract 1197.
7. Edmister WB, Schmidt CJ, Koelling TM, Proncelet BP, Kantor HL, Weisskoff RM. Arterial Gd-DTPA concentration measurements with GE EPI and Delta R2*. In: Proceedings of the 5th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Vancouver, Canada, 1997. Abstract 849.
8. van Osch MJ, Vonken EJ, Viergever MA, van der Grand J, Bakker CJ. Measuring the arterial input function with gradient echo sequences. Magn Reson Med 2003;49:1067-1076.
9. Rausch M, Scheffler K, Rudin M, Radu EW. Analysis of input functions from different arterial branches with gamma variate functions and cluster analysis for quantitative blood volume measurements. Magn Reson Imaging 2000;18:1235-1243.
10. 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;193:637-641.
11. Carroll TJ, Rowley HA, Haughton VM. Automatic calculation of the arterial input function for cerebral perfusion imaging with MR imaging. Radiology 2003;227:593-600.
12. van Osch MJ, Vonken EJ, Bakker CJ, Viergever MA. Correcting partial volume artifacts of the arterial input function in quantitative cerebral perfusion MRI. Magn Reson Med 2001;45:477-485.
13. 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.
14. Vonken EP, Beekman FJ, Bakker CJ, Viergever MA. Maximum likelihood estimation of cerebral blood flow in dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI. Magn Reson Med 1999;41:343-350.
15. Wu O, Ostergaard L, Koroshetz WJ, et al. Effects of tracer arrival time on flow estimates in MR perfusion-weighted imaging. Magn Reson Med 2003;50:856-864.
16. 2 reactivity measurements in patients with symptomatic internal carotid artery occlusion. Neuroimage 2002; 17:469-478.
17. Alsop DC, Wedmid A, Schlaug G. Defining a local input function for perfusion quantification with bolus contrast MRI. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Honolulu, 2002. Abstract 659.
18. Duhamel G, Bazelaire CM, Alsop DC. Input functions from echoplanar hemodynamic studies using dynamic susceptibility contrast: a numerical model compared to in-vivo results. In: Proceedings of the llth Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Toronto, Canada, 2003. Abstract 2199.
19. Haacke EM, Brown RW, Thompson MR, Venkatesan R. Magnetic properties of tissues: theory and measurement. In: Magnetic resonance imaging: physical principles and sequence design. John Wiley & Sons: 1999. p 569-618.
20. van Osch MJP, Vonken EPA, Wu O, Viergever MA, van der Grond J, Bakker CJG. Model of the human vasculature for studying the influence of contrast injection speed on cerebral perfusion MRI. Magn Reson Med 2003;50:614-622.
21. Thijs VN, Somford DM, Bammer R, Robberecht W, Moseley ME, Albers GW. Influence of arterial input function on hypoperfusion volumes measured with perfusion-weighted imaging. Stroke 2004; 35:94-98.