4.5 Article

Chemical exchange saturation transfer imaging of phosphocreatine in the muscle

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
卷 81, 期 6, 页码 3476-3487

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.27655

关键词

CEST; chemical exchange; creatine; phosphocreatine; ultrahigh field

资金

  1. Institute for Basic Science [IBS-R015-D1]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2016R1A2A1A05004952]
  3. National Institutes of Health [NS100703]
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2016R1A2A1A05004952] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To determine the exchange parameters for the CEST of phosphocreatine (PCrCEST) in phantoms and to characterize PCrCEST in vivo in the muscle at different saturation powers and magnetic fields. Methods: Exchange parameters were measured in PCr solutions using varying saturation power at 15.2 T. Z-spectra were analyzed using multipool Lorentzian fitting in the hindlimb using various powers at 2 different fields: 9.4 T and 15.2 T. Modulation of PCr signal in PCrCEST and phosphorus MRS was observed in the mouse hindlimb before and after euthanasia. Results: The exchange rate of PCr at physiological pH in phantoms was confirmed to be in a much slower exchange regime compared with Cr: k(ex) at pH 7.3 and below was less than 400 s(-1). There was insufficient signal for detection of PCrCEST in the brain, but PCrCEST in the hindlimb was measured to be 2.98% +/- 0.43 at a B-1 of 0.47 mu T at 15.2 T, which is 29% higher than 9.4T values. The value of PCrCEST at a B-1 of 0.71 mu T was not significantly different than that measured at a B1 of 0.47 mu T. After euthanasia, PCrCEST signal dropped by 82.3% compared with an 85% decrease in PCr in phosphorus MRS, whereas CrCEST signal increased by 90.6%. Conclusion: The PCrCEST technique has viable sensitivity in the muscle at high fields and shows promise for the study of metabolic dysfunction and cardiac systems.

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

4.5
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