Cargando…

A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters

Quantitative models of magnetization transfer (MT) allow the estimation of physical properties of tissue which are thought to reflect myelination, and are therefore likely to be useful for clinical application. Although a model describing a two-pool system under continuous wave-saturation has been a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cercignani, Mara, Barker, Gareth J.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2323944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18191599
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmr.2007.12.012
_version_ 1782152697094340608
author Cercignani, Mara
Barker, Gareth J.
author_facet Cercignani, Mara
Barker, Gareth J.
author_sort Cercignani, Mara
collection PubMed
description Quantitative models of magnetization transfer (MT) allow the estimation of physical properties of tissue which are thought to reflect myelination, and are therefore likely to be useful for clinical application. Although a model describing a two-pool system under continuous wave-saturation has been available for two decades, generalizing such a model to pulsed MT, and therefore to in vivo applications, is not straightforward, and only recently have a range of equations predicting the outcome of pulsed MT experiments been proposed. These solutions of the 2-pool model are based on differing assumptions and involve differing degrees of complexity, so their individual advantages and limitations are not always obvious. This paper is concerned with the comparison of three differing signal equations. After reviewing the theory behind each of them, their accuracy and precision is investigated using numerical simulations under variable experimental conditions such as degree of T(1)-weighting of the acquisition sequence and SNR, and the consistency of numerical results is tested using in vivo data. We show that while in conditions of minimal T(1)-weighting, high SNR, and large duty cycle the solutions of the three equations are consistent, they have a different tolerance to deviations from the basic assumptions behind their development, which should be taken into account when designing a quantitative MT protocol.
format Text
id pubmed-2323944
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-23239442008-05-22 A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters Cercignani, Mara Barker, Gareth J. J Magn Reson Article Quantitative models of magnetization transfer (MT) allow the estimation of physical properties of tissue which are thought to reflect myelination, and are therefore likely to be useful for clinical application. Although a model describing a two-pool system under continuous wave-saturation has been available for two decades, generalizing such a model to pulsed MT, and therefore to in vivo applications, is not straightforward, and only recently have a range of equations predicting the outcome of pulsed MT experiments been proposed. These solutions of the 2-pool model are based on differing assumptions and involve differing degrees of complexity, so their individual advantages and limitations are not always obvious. This paper is concerned with the comparison of three differing signal equations. After reviewing the theory behind each of them, their accuracy and precision is investigated using numerical simulations under variable experimental conditions such as degree of T(1)-weighting of the acquisition sequence and SNR, and the consistency of numerical results is tested using in vivo data. We show that while in conditions of minimal T(1)-weighting, high SNR, and large duty cycle the solutions of the three equations are consistent, they have a different tolerance to deviations from the basic assumptions behind their development, which should be taken into account when designing a quantitative MT protocol. Elsevier 2008-04 /pmc/articles/PMC2323944/ /pubmed/18191599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmr.2007.12.012 Text en © 2008 Elsevier Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Open Access under CC BY 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) license
spellingShingle Article
Cercignani, Mara
Barker, Gareth J.
A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters
title A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters
title_full A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters
title_fullStr A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters
title_full_unstemmed A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters
title_short A comparison between equations describing in vivo MT: The effects of noise and sequence parameters
title_sort comparison between equations describing in vivo mt: the effects of noise and sequence parameters
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2323944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18191599
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmr.2007.12.012
work_keys_str_mv AT cercignanimara acomparisonbetweenequationsdescribinginvivomttheeffectsofnoiseandsequenceparameters
AT barkergarethj acomparisonbetweenequationsdescribinginvivomttheeffectsofnoiseandsequenceparameters
AT cercignanimara comparisonbetweenequationsdescribinginvivomttheeffectsofnoiseandsequenceparameters
AT barkergarethj comparisonbetweenequationsdescribinginvivomttheeffectsofnoiseandsequenceparameters