4.3 Article

Accuracy and stability of measuring GABA, glutamate, and glutamine by proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy: A phantom study at 4 Tesla

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE
卷 208, 期 2, 页码 210-218

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2010.11.003

关键词

Magnetic resonance spectroscopy; Phantom; Glutamate; GABA; Glutamine

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health (MEH) [K08 MH064175]
  2. Counter-Drug Technology Assessment Center (CTAC)
  3. Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP)
  4. Army Contracting Agency [DABT63-99-C]
  5. NIH [S10 RR13938]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy has the potential to provide valuable information about alterations in gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), glutamate (Glu), and glutamine (Gin) in psychiatric and neurological disorders. In order to use this technique effectively, it is important to establish the accuracy and reproducibility of the methodology. In this study, phantoms with known metabolite concentrations were used to compare the accuracy of 2D J-resolved MRS, single-echo 30 ms PRESS, and GABA-edited MEGA-PRESS for measuring all three aforementioned neurochemicals simultaneously. The phantoms included metabolite concentrations above and below the physiological range and scans were performed at baseline, 1 week, and 1 month time-points. For GABA measurement, MEGA-PRESS proved optimal with a measured-to-target correlation of R-2 = 0.999, with J-resolved providing R-2 = 0.973 for GABA. All three methods proved effective in measuring Glu with R-2 = 0.987 (30 ms PRESS), R-2 = 0.996 (J-resolved) and R-2 = 0.910 (MEGA-PRESS). J-resolved and MEGA-PRESS yielded good results for Gln measures with respective R-2 = 0.855 (J-resolved) and R-2 = 0.815 (MEGA-PRESS). The 30 ms PRESS method proved ineffective in measuring GABA and Gln. When measurement stability at in vivo concentration was assessed as a function of varying spectral quality, J-resolved proved the most stable and immune to signal-to-noise and linewidth fluctuation compared to MEGA-PRESS and 30 ms PRESS. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据