• NeuroImage · Jun 2015

    Multi-vendor reliability of arterial spin labeling perfusion MRI using a near-identical sequence: implications for multi-center studies.

    • Henri J M M Mutsaerts, Matthias J P van Osch, Fernando O Zelaya, Danny J J Wang, Wibeke Nordhøy, Yi Wang, Stephen Wastling, Maria A Fernandez-Seara, E T Petersen, Francesca B Pizzini, Sameeha Fallatah, Jeroen Hendrikse, Oliver Geier, GüntherMatthiasMFraunhofer MEVIS, Bremen, Germany; MR Physics, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany., Xavier Golay, Aart J Nederveen, Atle Bjørnerud, and Inge R Groote.
    • Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: henkjanmutsaerts@gmail.com.
    • Neuroimage. 2015 Jun 1; 113: 143-52.

    IntroductionA main obstacle that impedes standardized clinical and research applications of arterial spin labeling (ASL), is the substantial differences between the commercial implementations of ASL from major MRI vendors. In this study, we compare a single identical 2D gradient-echo EPI pseudo-continuous ASL (PCASL) sequence implemented on 3T scanners from three vendors (General Electric Healthcare, Philips Healthcare and Siemens Healthcare) within the same center and with the same subjects.Material And MethodsFourteen healthy volunteers (50% male, age 26.4±4.7years) were scanned twice on each scanner in an interleaved manner within 3h. Because of differences in gradient and coil specifications, two separate studies were performed with slightly different sequence parameters, with one scanner used across both studies for comparison. Reproducibility was evaluated by means of quantitative cerebral blood flow (CBF) agreement and inter-session variation, both on a region-of-interest (ROI) and voxel level. In addition, a qualitative similarity comparison of the CBF maps was performed by three experienced neuro-radiologists.ResultsThere were no CBF differences between vendors in study 1 (p>0.1), but there were CBF differences of 2-19% between vendors in study 2 (p<0.001 in most gray matter ROIs) and 10-22% difference in CBF values obtained with the same vendor between studies (p<0.001 in most gray matter ROIs). The inter-vendor inter-session variation was not significantly larger than the intra-vendor variation in all (p>0.1) but one of the ROIs (p<0.001).ConclusionThis study demonstrates the possibility to acquire comparable cerebral CBF maps on scanners of different vendors. Small differences in sequence parameters can have a larger effect on the reproducibility of ASL than hardware or software differences between vendors. These results suggest that researchers should strive to employ identical labeling and readout strategies in multi-center ASL studies.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.