2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.08.083
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A control point interpolation method for the non-parametric quantification of cerebral haemodynamics from dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

3
53
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
3
53
0
Order By: Relevance
“…12 Owing to the inherent signal-to-noise constraints of computerized tomography and DSC-MRI, however, the use of model-free approaches may be suboptimal because of the unphysiological oscillations in the estimated residue function, 13 which would propagate to its derivative and thereby CTH. While the regularization steps of model-free deconvolution approaches 11,13 may stabilize CBF estimates, [14][15][16] they are not optimized to detect salient features of the residue function. This has led to the development of deconvolution approaches that instead use flexible, yet realistic, parametrized models to describe tissue residue in the deconvolution step.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…12 Owing to the inherent signal-to-noise constraints of computerized tomography and DSC-MRI, however, the use of model-free approaches may be suboptimal because of the unphysiological oscillations in the estimated residue function, 13 which would propagate to its derivative and thereby CTH. While the regularization steps of model-free deconvolution approaches 11,13 may stabilize CBF estimates, [14][15][16] they are not optimized to detect salient features of the residue function. This has led to the development of deconvolution approaches that instead use flexible, yet realistic, parametrized models to describe tissue residue in the deconvolution step.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This has led to the development of deconvolution approaches that instead use flexible, yet realistic, parametrized models to describe tissue residue in the deconvolution step. 16,17 We show that the expectation-maximization (EM) and Levenberg-Marquardt steps of an existing parametric approach 17 can be explicitly calculated to allow simple and efficient computation of CTH and oxygen extraction capacity (OEF max ) in addition to the traditional 'macroscopic' perfusion markers such as CBF and MTT. We assess the performance of the algorithm across a wide range of physiologic hemodynamic conditions, 3 and evaluate its robustness to low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) as well as bolus delay, and compare with model-free approaches.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This method has been shown to improve the accuracy of the estimated CBF when compared with the actual CBF. Figure 2 shows a sample CBF image, plotted in arbitrary units, of a healthy subject and an ischaemic stroke patient obtained from Mehndiratta et al [6].
Figure 2.CBF map, using arbitrary units, of a healthy subject ( a ) and an ischaemic stroke patient ( b ) taken from Mehndiratta et al [6].
…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11,17 That is, current deconvolution methods cannot capture the rapid kinetics of intravascular tracers with sufficient accuracy for CBF quantification. 28 Improved deconvolution algorithms have been proposed, 11,29,30 but must be validated before clinical use of CBF maps. The MTT dependence of these algorithms requires validation in humans.…”
Section: Deconvolution Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%