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

A 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 (...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:NeuroImage (Orlando, Fla.) Fla.), 2015-06, Vol.113, p.143-152
Hauptverfasser: Mutsaerts, Henri J.M.M., van Osch, Matthias J.P., Zelaya, Fernando O., Wang, Danny J.J., Nordhøy, Wibeke, Wang, Yi, Wastling, Stephen, Fernandez-Seara, Maria A., Petersen, E.T., Pizzini, Francesca B., Fallatah, Sameeha, Hendrikse, Jeroen, Geier, Oliver, Günther, Matthias, Golay, Xavier, Nederveen, Aart J., Bjørnerud, Atle, Groote, Inge R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:A 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. Fourteen 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. There 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
ISSN:1053-8119
1095-9572
DOI:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.043