4.7 Article

The radial diffusivity and magnetization transfer pool size ratio are sensitive markers for demyelination in a rat model of type III multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 74, 期 -, 页码 298-305

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.034

关键词

Quantitative magnetization transfer (qMT); Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI); 9.4 T; White matter; Myelin; Demyelination; Lippopolysaccharide (LPS); Rat brain; Multiple sclerosis (MS)

资金

  1. NIH [R01EB001452, R01EB001744]
  2. Vanderbilt Bridge

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Determining biophysical sensitivity and specificity of quantitative magnetic resonance imaging is essential to develop effective imaging metrics of neurodegeneration. Among these metrics, apparent pool size ratio (PSR) from quantitative magnetization transfer (qMT) imaging and radial diffusivity (RD) from diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) are both known to relate to histological measure of myelin density and integrity. However their relative sensitivities towards quantitative myelin detection are unknown. In this study, we correlated high-resolution quantitative magnetic resonance imaging measures of subvoxel tissue structures with corresponding quantitative myelin histology in a lipopolysaccharide (LPS) mediated animal model of MS. Specifically, we acquired quantitative magnetization transfer (qMT) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) metrics (on the same tissue sample) in an animal model system of type III oligodendrogliopathy which lacked prominent lymphocytic infiltration, a system that had not been previously examined with quantitative M. We find that the qMT measured apparent pool size ratio (PSR) showed the strongest correlation with a histological measure of myelin content. DTI measured RD showed the next strongest correlation, and other DTI and relaxation parameters (such as the longitudinal relaxation rate (R1(f)) or fractional anisotropy (FA)) showed considerably weaker correlations with myelin content. (c) 2013 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

4.7
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