4.2 Article

Phantom Validation of DCE-MRI Magnitude and Phase-Based Vascular Input Function Measurements

Journal

TOMOGRAPHY
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 77-89

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.18383/j.tom.2019.00001

Keywords

dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI); permeability; arterial input function (AIF); quantification; MRI phase; phantom

Funding

  1. National Science and Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [386277]
  2. Brain Tumor Foundation of Canada Pilot Grant
  3. Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation-Department of Radiation Oncology Academic Enrichment Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurate, patient-specific measurement of arterial input functions (AIF) may improve model-based analysis of vascular permeability. This study investigated factors affecting AIF measurements from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) magnitude (AIFMAGN) and phase (AIFPHA) signals, and compared them against computed tomography (CT) (AIFCT), under controlled conditions relevant to clinical protocols using a multimodality flow phantom. The flow phantom was applied at flip angles of 20 degrees and 30 degrees, flow rates (3-7.5 mL/s), and peak bolus concentrations (0.5-10 mM), for in-plane and through-plane flow. Spatial 3D-FLASH signal and variable flip angle T1 profiles were measured to investigate in-flow and radiofrequency-related biases, and magnitude-and phase-derived Gd-DTPA concentrations were compared. MRI AIF performance was tested against AIFCT via Pearson correlation analysis. AIFMAGN was sensitive to imaging orientation, spatial location, flip angle, and flow rate, and it grossly underestimated AIFCT peak concentrations. Conversion to Gd-DTPA concentration using T1 taken at the same orientation and flow rate as the dynamic contrast-enhanced acquisition improved AIFMAGN accuracy; yet, AIFMAGN metrics remained variable and significantly reduced from AIFCT at concentrations above 2.5 mM. AIFPHA performed equivalently within 1 mM to AIFCT across all tested conditions. AIFPHA, but not AIFMAGN, reported equivalent measurements to AIFCT across the range of tested conditions. AIFPHA showed superior robustness.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available