Perkiö Jussi, Aronen Hannu J, Kangasmäki Aki, Liu Yawu, Karonen Jari, Savolainen Sauli, Østergaard Leif
Department of Radiology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Magn Reson Med. 2002 May;47(5):973-81. doi: 10.1002/mrm.10126.
Four different postprocessing methods to determine cerebral blood volume (CBV) and contrast agent mean transit time (MTT) by dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI were compared. CBV was determined by two different methods that integrate tracer concentration-time curves numerically and by two other methods that take recirculation into account. For the two methods that use numerical integration, one method cuts the integration after the first pass while the other method integrates over the whole time series. For the two methods that account for recirculation, one method uses a gamma-variate fit, whereas the other method utilizes tissue impulse response. All four methods determine MTT as the ratio of CBV and cerebral blood flow (CBF). In each case, CBF was obtained as the height of the impulse response obtained by deconvolving the tissue concentration-time curves with a noninvasively determined arterial input function. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to determine the reliability of the methods and the validity of the simulations was supported by observation of similar trends in 13 acute stroke patients. The method of determining CBV and subsequently MTT was found to affect the measured value especially in areas where MTT is prolonged, but had no apparent effect on the visually determined hypoperfusion volumes.
比较了四种不同的后处理方法,通过动态磁敏感对比(DSC)磁共振成像(MRI)来确定脑血容量(CBV)和对比剂平均通过时间(MTT)。CBV通过两种不同的方法来确定,一种是对示踪剂浓度-时间曲线进行数值积分,另一种是考虑再循环的另外两种方法。对于使用数值积分的两种方法,一种方法在首次通过后截断积分,而另一种方法对整个时间序列进行积分。对于考虑再循环的两种方法,一种方法使用伽马变量拟合,而另一种方法利用组织脉冲响应。所有四种方法都将MTT确定为CBV与脑血流量(CBF)的比值。在每种情况下,CBF通过对组织浓度-时间曲线与非侵入性确定的动脉输入函数进行去卷积得到的脉冲响应的高度来获得。进行了蒙特卡罗模拟以确定这些方法的可靠性,并且在13例急性中风患者中观察到类似趋势支持了模拟的有效性。发现确定CBV以及随后MTT的方法会影响测量值,尤其是在MTT延长的区域,但对视觉确定的灌注不足体积没有明显影响。