2018
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25989
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

MRI‐based measurements of whole‐brain global cerebral blood flow: Comparison and validation at 1.5T and 3T

Abstract: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1273-1280.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(101 reference statements)
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In fact, our results show that a superior BOLD reproducibility was present at both 1.5 and 3 T, with all of the CV scan values below the 33% fiducial limit and ICC above 0.4 for the estimated parameters. This evidence indicates that the reproducibility of BOLD responses is independent of field strengths, similar to existing cross‐field reproducibility studies using other MRI techniques, including phase contrast MRI and diffusion imaging . We surmise that the insignificant difference in reproducibility at 1.5 and 3 T may be associated with the fact that the unfavorable susceptibility effect can be compensated by the improved BOLD‐related responses at 3 T, resulting in a balanced data reproducibility similar to that at 1.5 T. Another possible explanation behind the consistent reproducibility across field strengths is the use of 16‐channel coils in both systems.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…In fact, our results show that a superior BOLD reproducibility was present at both 1.5 and 3 T, with all of the CV scan values below the 33% fiducial limit and ICC above 0.4 for the estimated parameters. This evidence indicates that the reproducibility of BOLD responses is independent of field strengths, similar to existing cross‐field reproducibility studies using other MRI techniques, including phase contrast MRI and diffusion imaging . We surmise that the insignificant difference in reproducibility at 1.5 and 3 T may be associated with the fact that the unfavorable susceptibility effect can be compensated by the improved BOLD‐related responses at 3 T, resulting in a balanced data reproducibility similar to that at 1.5 T. Another possible explanation behind the consistent reproducibility across field strengths is the use of 16‐channel coils in both systems.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…47 In addition, a higher BMI was significantly associated with reduced flow velocity in the common carotid artery (CCA) but not in other arteries, such as the middle cerebral artery and posterior cerebral artery (PCA). 48 To further explore whether obesity has a significant impact on flow velocity, we retrospectively analyzed another sub-group of young subjects (seven obese and nine lean males) in whom phase-contrast MRI (following the protocol suggested by Chen et al 49 ) was used to measure blood flow velocity of four feeding arteries of the brain (right internal carotid artery, left internal carotid artery, right vertebral artery, and left vertebral artery). Our results…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the present study, we segmented the GM ROIs and ROIs of different lobes using FSL 27 and MRIcloud 28 at 3 T, respectively. Since the normal brain volume exhibits a significant variation anyway, the variability in the segmentation software 46 and field strengths 47 can lead to differences in the segmentation results. Even for the same segmentation strategy, different thresholds in the definition of tissue types may yield different CVR values 15 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%