2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2020.106909
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding aqueous and non-aqueous proton T1 relaxation in brain

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
62
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
3
62
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Conversely, we found that E[R 1 ] in WM is slightly lower than in GM, which on the other hand agrees with in vivo rat model-based diffusion-relaxation correlation [99]. However, besides the obvious futility of trying to compare quantitative relaxation measures from previous in vivo studies with our data on an ex vivo specimen at rather extreme levels of added contrast agent to reduce the scanning time, there are some more fundamental issues with attempting to compare quantitative R 1 from different studies or different pulse sequences as recently elucidated in detail by Manning et al [8]. The value of R 1 observed by varying some relaxation delay in the pulse sequence does not report on just the properties of the water molecules giving rise to signal intensity in the actually detected images, but instead results from a complex interplay between partial excitation by the radiofrequency pulses, relaxation, and exchange of molecules, protons, or magnetization between numerous proton pools, for instance intra/extracellular water, myelin water, nonaqueous myelin, and non-aqueous non-myelin protons, all having have their distinct NMR properties in terms of R 1 , R 2 , and linewidth.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Conversely, we found that E[R 1 ] in WM is slightly lower than in GM, which on the other hand agrees with in vivo rat model-based diffusion-relaxation correlation [99]. However, besides the obvious futility of trying to compare quantitative relaxation measures from previous in vivo studies with our data on an ex vivo specimen at rather extreme levels of added contrast agent to reduce the scanning time, there are some more fundamental issues with attempting to compare quantitative R 1 from different studies or different pulse sequences as recently elucidated in detail by Manning et al [8]. The value of R 1 observed by varying some relaxation delay in the pulse sequence does not report on just the properties of the water molecules giving rise to signal intensity in the actually detected images, but instead results from a complex interplay between partial excitation by the radiofrequency pulses, relaxation, and exchange of molecules, protons, or magnetization between numerous proton pools, for instance intra/extracellular water, myelin water, nonaqueous myelin, and non-aqueous non-myelin protons, all having have their distinct NMR properties in terms of R 1 , R 2 , and linewidth.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…, are sensitive to chemical exchange of protons between water and hydroxyl and amine groups on metabolites and macromolecules [6,7], molecular exchange between compartments [8], magnetization transfer/cross relaxation between exchangeable and non-exchangeable protons [9], and paramagnetic relaxation from iron or added contrast agents [8,10]. Especially for studies of the nervous system, the diffusion is often expressed in terms of a diffusion tensor D related to cell shapes and orientations [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have presented a generalization of the Bloch model to nonexponential decays or, equivalently, to non-Lorentzian lineshapes. We derived and tested the model in the context of pulsed magnetization transfer 1,2,10 and demonstrated that the generalized Bloch model-in contrast to existing pulsed-MT models 10,11 -unifies the original Bloch model and Henkelman's steady-state model, while also adequately describing the rotation induced by short RF-pulses 12 (cf. Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to describe magnetization transfer, we incorporate the generalized Bloch equations into a 2-pool model. We choose this model over the more accurate 4-pool model described by Manning et al 12 because it is difficult to determine the large number of parameters of the 4-pool model in vivo due to experimental constraints. However, the generalized Bloch model can be incorporated in models with an arbitrary number of pools.…”
Section: Magnetization Transfer To and From The Free Poolmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation