Catherine A. Morgan, David L. Thomas, Xingfeng Shao, Amnah Mahroo, Tabitha J. Manson, Vinod Suresh, Deidre Jansson, Yolanda Ohene, Matthias Günther, Danny J. J. Wang, Lynette J. Tippett, Michael Dragunow
{"title":"利用扩散预处理和多回波动脉自旋标记测量血脑屏障水交换率:定量值和年龄依赖性的比较","authors":"Catherine A. Morgan, David L. Thomas, Xingfeng Shao, Amnah Mahroo, Tabitha J. Manson, Vinod Suresh, Deidre Jansson, Yolanda Ohene, Matthias Günther, Danny J. J. Wang, Lynette J. Tippett, Michael Dragunow","doi":"10.1002/nbm.5256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Water exchange rate (Kw) across the blood–brain barrier (BBB) is an important physiological parameter that may provide new insight into ageing and neurodegenerative disease. Recently, two non‐invasive arterial spin labelling (ASL) MRI methods have been developed to measure Kw, but results from the different methods have not been directly compared. Furthermore, the association of Kw with age for each method has not been investigated in a single cohort. Thirty participants (70% female, 63.8 ± 10.4 years) were scanned at 3 T with Diffusion‐Prepared ASL (DP‐ASL) and Multi‐Echo ASL (ME‐ASL) using previously implemented acquisition and analysis protocols. Grey matter Kw, cerebral blood flow (CBF) and arterial transit time (ATT) were extracted. CBF values were consistent; approximately 50 ml/min/100 g for both methods, and a strong positive correlation in CBF from both methods across participants (r = 0.82, p < 0.001). ATT was significantly different between methods (on average 147.7 ms lower when measured with DP‐ASL compared to ME‐ASL) but was positively correlated across participants (r = 0.39, p < 0.05). Significantly different Kw values of 106.6 ± 19.7 min<jats:sup>−1</jats:sup> and 306.8 ± 71.7 min<jats:sup>−1</jats:sup> were measured using DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL, respectively, and DP‐ASL Kw and ME‐ASL Kw were negatively correlated across participants (r = −0.46, p < 0.01). Kw measured using ME‐ASL had a significant linear relationship with age (p < 0.05). In conclusion, DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL provided estimates of Kw with significantly different quantitative values and inconsistent dependence with age. We propose future standardisation of modelling and fitting methods for DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL, to evaluate the effect on Kw quantification. Also, sensitivity and bias analyses should be performed for both approaches, to assess the effect of varying acquisition and fitting parameters. Lastly, comparison with independent measures of BBB water transport, and with physiological and clinical biomarkers known to be associated with changes in BBB permeability, are essential to validate the ASL methods, and to demonstrate their clinical utility.","PeriodicalId":19309,"journal":{"name":"NMR in Biomedicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measurement of blood–brain barrier water exchange rate using diffusion‐prepared and multi‐echo arterial spin labelling: Comparison of quantitative values and age dependence\",\"authors\":\"Catherine A. Morgan, David L. Thomas, Xingfeng Shao, Amnah Mahroo, Tabitha J. Manson, Vinod Suresh, Deidre Jansson, Yolanda Ohene, Matthias Günther, Danny J. J. Wang, Lynette J. Tippett, Michael Dragunow\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/nbm.5256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Water exchange rate (Kw) across the blood–brain barrier (BBB) is an important physiological parameter that may provide new insight into ageing and neurodegenerative disease. Recently, two non‐invasive arterial spin labelling (ASL) MRI methods have been developed to measure Kw, but results from the different methods have not been directly compared. Furthermore, the association of Kw with age for each method has not been investigated in a single cohort. Thirty participants (70% female, 63.8 ± 10.4 years) were scanned at 3 T with Diffusion‐Prepared ASL (DP‐ASL) and Multi‐Echo ASL (ME‐ASL) using previously implemented acquisition and analysis protocols. Grey matter Kw, cerebral blood flow (CBF) and arterial transit time (ATT) were extracted. CBF values were consistent; approximately 50 ml/min/100 g for both methods, and a strong positive correlation in CBF from both methods across participants (r = 0.82, p < 0.001). ATT was significantly different between methods (on average 147.7 ms lower when measured with DP‐ASL compared to ME‐ASL) but was positively correlated across participants (r = 0.39, p < 0.05). Significantly different Kw values of 106.6 ± 19.7 min<jats:sup>−1</jats:sup> and 306.8 ± 71.7 min<jats:sup>−1</jats:sup> were measured using DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL, respectively, and DP‐ASL Kw and ME‐ASL Kw were negatively correlated across participants (r = −0.46, p < 0.01). Kw measured using ME‐ASL had a significant linear relationship with age (p < 0.05). In conclusion, DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL provided estimates of Kw with significantly different quantitative values and inconsistent dependence with age. We propose future standardisation of modelling and fitting methods for DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL, to evaluate the effect on Kw quantification. Also, sensitivity and bias analyses should be performed for both approaches, to assess the effect of varying acquisition and fitting parameters. Lastly, comparison with independent measures of BBB water transport, and with physiological and clinical biomarkers known to be associated with changes in BBB permeability, are essential to validate the ASL methods, and to demonstrate their clinical utility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19309,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NMR in Biomedicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NMR in Biomedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.5256\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NMR in Biomedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.5256","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Measurement of blood–brain barrier water exchange rate using diffusion‐prepared and multi‐echo arterial spin labelling: Comparison of quantitative values and age dependence
Water exchange rate (Kw) across the blood–brain barrier (BBB) is an important physiological parameter that may provide new insight into ageing and neurodegenerative disease. Recently, two non‐invasive arterial spin labelling (ASL) MRI methods have been developed to measure Kw, but results from the different methods have not been directly compared. Furthermore, the association of Kw with age for each method has not been investigated in a single cohort. Thirty participants (70% female, 63.8 ± 10.4 years) were scanned at 3 T with Diffusion‐Prepared ASL (DP‐ASL) and Multi‐Echo ASL (ME‐ASL) using previously implemented acquisition and analysis protocols. Grey matter Kw, cerebral blood flow (CBF) and arterial transit time (ATT) were extracted. CBF values were consistent; approximately 50 ml/min/100 g for both methods, and a strong positive correlation in CBF from both methods across participants (r = 0.82, p < 0.001). ATT was significantly different between methods (on average 147.7 ms lower when measured with DP‐ASL compared to ME‐ASL) but was positively correlated across participants (r = 0.39, p < 0.05). Significantly different Kw values of 106.6 ± 19.7 min−1 and 306.8 ± 71.7 min−1 were measured using DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL, respectively, and DP‐ASL Kw and ME‐ASL Kw were negatively correlated across participants (r = −0.46, p < 0.01). Kw measured using ME‐ASL had a significant linear relationship with age (p < 0.05). In conclusion, DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL provided estimates of Kw with significantly different quantitative values and inconsistent dependence with age. We propose future standardisation of modelling and fitting methods for DP‐ASL and ME‐ASL, to evaluate the effect on Kw quantification. Also, sensitivity and bias analyses should be performed for both approaches, to assess the effect of varying acquisition and fitting parameters. Lastly, comparison with independent measures of BBB water transport, and with physiological and clinical biomarkers known to be associated with changes in BBB permeability, are essential to validate the ASL methods, and to demonstrate their clinical utility.
期刊介绍:
NMR in Biomedicine is a journal devoted to the publication of original full-length papers, rapid communications and review articles describing the development of magnetic resonance spectroscopy or imaging methods or their use to investigate physiological, biochemical, biophysical or medical problems. Topics for submitted papers should be in one of the following general categories: (a) development of methods and instrumentation for MR of biological systems; (b) studies of normal or diseased organs, tissues or cells; (c) diagnosis or treatment of disease. Reports may cover work on patients or healthy human subjects, in vivo animal experiments, studies of isolated organs or cultured cells, analysis of tissue extracts, NMR theory, experimental techniques, or instrumentation.