Study of common quantification methods of amide proton transfer magnetic resonance imaging for ischemic stroke detection.
Saved in:
| Title: | Study of common quantification methods of amide proton transfer magnetic resonance imaging for ischemic stroke detection. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Foo, Lee Sze1 (AUTHOR), Larkin, James R.2 (AUTHOR), Sutherland, Brad A.3,4 (AUTHOR), Ray, Kevin J.2 (AUTHOR), Yap, Wun‐She5 (AUTHOR), Hum, Yan Chai1 (AUTHOR), Lai, Khin Wee6 (AUTHOR), Manan, Hanani Abdul7 (AUTHOR), Sibson, Nicola R.2 (AUTHOR), Tee, Yee Kai1 (AUTHOR) teeyeekai@gmail.com |
| Source: | Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Apr2021, Vol. 85 Issue 4, p2188-2200. 13p. |
| Subjects: | Proton magnetic resonance, Magnetic resonance imaging, Cerebral circulation, Magnetization transfer, Pearson correlation (Statistics) |
| Abstract: | Purpose: To assess the correlation and differences between common amide proton transfer (APT) quantification methods in the diagnosis of ischemic stroke. Methods: Five APT quantification methods, including asymmetry analysis and its variants as well as two Lorentzian model‐based methods, were applied to data acquired from six rats that underwent middle cerebral artery occlusion scanned at 9.4T. Diffusion and perfusion‐weighted images, and water relaxation time maps were also acquired to study the relationship of these conventional imaging modalities with the different APT quantification methods. Results: The APT ischemic area estimates had varying sizes (Jaccard index: 0.544 ≤ J ≤ 0.971) and had varying correlations in their distributions (Pearson correlation coefficient: 0.104 ≤ r ≤ 0.995), revealing discrepancies in the quantified ischemic areas. The Lorentzian methods produced the highest contrast‐to‐noise ratios (CNRs; 1.427 ≤ CNR ≤ 2.002), but generated APT ischemic areas that were comparable in size to the cerebral blood flow (CBF) deficit areas; asymmetry analysis and its variants produced APT ischemic areas that were smaller than the CBF deficit areas but larger than the apparent diffusion coefficient deficit areas, though having lower CNRs (0.561 ≤ CNR ≤ 1.083). Conclusion: There is a need to further investigate the accuracy and correlation of each quantification method with the pathophysiology using a larger scale multi‐imaging modality and multi‐time‐point clinical study. Future studies should include the magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry results alongside the findings of the study to facilitate the comparison of results between different centers and also the published literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
Be the first to leave a comment!
