Comparative evaluation of 3-dimensional pseudocontinuous arterial spin labeling with dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion magnetic resonance imaging in grading of human glioma

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 321-326

  Roy, Bhaswati ^a   Awasthi, Rishi ^b   Bindal, Amit ^c   Sahoo, Prativa ^d   Kumar, Rajan ^b   Behari, Sanjay ^b   Ojha, Bal K ^c   Husain, Nuzhat ^e   Pandey, Chandra M ^b   Rathore, Ram K S ^d   Gupta, Rakesh Kumar ^a  

^a Fortis Memorial Research Institute   (India)

^b SANJAY GANDHI POSTGRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (India)

^c KING GEORGE'S MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (India)

^d INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KANPUR   (India)

^e Institute of Medical Sciences ^*  (India)

Author keywords

arterial spin labeling; dynamic contrast enhanced MRI; glioma

Indexed keywords

BLOOD; BLOOD VESSELS; CORRELATION METHODS; HEMODYNAMICS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; TUMORS;

3-DIMENSIONAL; ARTERIAL SPIN LABELING; CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; DYNAMIC CONTRAST-ENHANCED; DYNAMIC CONTRAST-ENHANCED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; GLIOMA; HIGH GRADES; LOW GRADE; MEAN AGES;

GRADING;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; BRAIN BLOOD FLOW; BRAIN BLOOD VOLUME; CANCER GRADING; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GLIOMA; GRAY MATTER; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PARENCHYMA; PERFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPIN LABELING; WHITE MATTER;

EID: 84878882901     PISSN: 03638715     EISSN: 15323145     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e318282d7e2     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Russell DS, Rubinstein LJ. Tumours of central neuroepithelial origin. In: Russell DS, Rubinstein LJ, eds. Pathology of Tumours of the Central Nervous System. 5th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1989:83-350.
2. Rees J. Advances in magnetic resonance imaging of brain tumours. Curr Opin Neurol. 2003;16:643-650.
3. Kurki T, Lundbom N, Kalimo H, et al. MR classification of brain gliomas: value of magnetization transfer and conventional imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 1995;13:501-511.
4. Mihara F, Numaguchi Y, Rothman M, et al. Non-enhancing supratentorial malignant astrocytomas: MR features and possible mechanisms. Radiat Med. 1995;13:11-17.
5. Maia AC Jr, Malheiros SM, da Rocha AJ, et al. MR cerebral blood volume maps correlated with vascular endothelial growth factor expression and tumor grade in nonenhancing gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26:777-783.
6. Batra A, Tripathi RP, Singh AK. Perfusion magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy of cerebral gliomas showing imperceptible contrast enhancement on conventional magnetic resonance imaging. Australas Radiol. 2004;48:324-332.
7. Scott JN, Brasher PM, Sevick RJ, et al. How often are nonenhancing supratentorial gliomas malignant? A population study. Neurology. 2002;59:947-949.
8. Law M, Yang S, Wang H, et al. Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24:1989-1998.
9. Barker FG 2nd, Chang SM, Huhn SL. Age and the risk of anaplasia in magnetic resonance non-enhancening supratentorial cerebral tumors. Cancer. 1997;80:936-941.
10. Chamberlain MC, Murovic JA, Levin VA. Absent of contrast enhancement on CT brain scans of patients with supratentorial malignant gliomas. Neurology. 1988;38:1371-1374.
11. Möller-Hartmann W, Herminghaus S, Krings T, et al. Clinical application of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the diagnosis of intracranial mass lesions. Neuroradiology. 2002;44:371-381.
12. Dean BL, Drayer BP, Bird CR, et al. Gliomas: classification with MR imaging. Radiology. 1990;174:411-415.
13. Watanabe M, Tanaka R, Takeda N. Magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology of cerebral gliomas. Neuroradiology. 1992;34:463-469.
14. Kondziolka D, Lunsford LD, Martinez AJ. Unreliability of contemporary neurodiagnostic imaging in evaluating suspected adult supratentorial (low-grade) astrocytoma. J Neurosurg. 1993;79:533-536.
15. Knopp EA, Cha S, Johnson G, et al. Glial neoplasms: dynamic contrast enhanced T2*-weighted MR imaging. Radiology. 1999;211:791-798.
16. Haris M, Husain N, Singh A, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced derived cerebral blood volume correlates better with leak correction than with no correction for vascular endothelial growth factor, microvascular density, and grading of astrocytoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2008;32:955-965.
17. Haris M, Husain N, Singh A, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) derived transfer coefficient (ktrans) is a surrogate marker of matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9) expression in brain tuberculomas. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;28:588-597.
18. Haris M, Gupta RK, Singh A, et al. Differentiation of infective from neoplastic brain lesions by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Neuroradiology. 2008;50:531-540.
19. Gupta RK, Awasthi R, Rathore RK, et al. Understanding epileptogenesis in calcified neurocysticercosis with perfusion MRI. Neurology. 2012;78:618-625.
20. Awasthi R, Pandey CM, Sahoo P, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging-derived kep as a potential biomarker of matrix metalloproteinase 9 expression in patients with glioblastoma multiforme: a pilot study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2012;36:125-130.
21. Wolf RL, Wang J, Wang S, et al. Grading of CNS neoplasms using continuous arterial spin labeled perfusion MR imaging at 3 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005;22:475-482.
22. Tourdias T, Rodrigo S, Oppenheim C, et al. Pulsed arterial spin labeling applications in brain tumors: practical review. J Neuroradiology. 2008;35:79-89.
23. Brown GG, Clark C, Liu TT. Measurement of cerebral perfusion with arterial spin labeling: Part 2. Applications. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2007;13:526-538.
24. Wirestam R, Lindgren E, van Westen D, et al. Cerebral perfusion information obtained by dynamic contrast-enhanced phase-shift magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with model-free arterial spin labelling. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2010;30:375-379.
25. Wu WC, Su MY, Chang CC, et al. Renal perfusion 3-T MR imaging: a comparative study of arterial spin labeling and dynamic contrast-enhanced techniques. Radiology. 2011;261:845-853.
26. Singh A, Haris M, Rathore D, et al. Quantification of physiological and hemodynamic indices using T(1) dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in intracranial mass lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26:871-880.
27. Awasthi R, Verma SK, Haris M, et al. Comparative evaluation of dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion with diffusion tensor imaging metrics in assessment of corticospinal tract infiltration in malignant glioma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:82-88.
28. Awasthi R, Rathore RK, Soni P, et al. Discriminant analysis to classify glioma grading using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and immunohistochemical markers. Neuroradiology. 2012;54:205-213.
29. Chawla S, Wang S, Wolf RL, et al. Arterial spin-labeling and MR spectroscopy in the differentiation of gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007;28:1683-1689.
30. Warmuth C, Gunther M, Zimmer C. Quantification of blood flow in brain tumors: comparison of arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 2003;228:523-532.
31. Chen Y, Wang J, Korczykowski M, et al. Comparison of reproducibility between continuous, pulsed, and pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling. In: Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of Int Soc Magn Reson in Med, 2010; Stockholm; Sweden.
32. Luh WM, Li TQ, Wong EC, et al. Pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling at 7T. In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of Int Soc Magn Reson in Med, 2008; Toronto, Canada.
33. Jung Y, Wong EC, Liu TT. Multiphase pseudocontinuous arterial spin labeling (MP-PCASL) for robust quantification of cerebral blood flow. Magn Reson Med. 2010;64:799-810.
34. Jahanian H, Noll DC, Hernandez-Garcia L. B0 field inhomogeneity considerations in pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling (pCASL): effects on tagging efficiency and correction strategy. NMR Biomed. 2011;24:1202-1209.