The effect of blood inflow and B1-field inhomogeneity on measurement of the arterial input function in axial 3D spoiled gradient echo dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI
Caleb Roberts
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorRoss Little
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorYvonne Watson
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorSha Zhao
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorDavid L. Buckley
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Division of Medical Physics, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Geoff J. M. Parker
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Stopford Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, United Kingdom===Search for more papers by this authorCaleb Roberts
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorRoss Little
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorYvonne Watson
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorSha Zhao
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorDavid L. Buckley
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Division of Medical Physics, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Geoff J. M. Parker
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
The University of Manchester Biomedical Imaging Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Imaging Science and Biomedical Engineering, School of Cancer and Enabling Sciences, The University of Manchester, Stopford Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, United Kingdom===Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
A major potential confound in axial 3D dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging studies is the blood inflow effect; therefore, the choice of slice location for arterial input function measurement within the imaging volume must be considered carefully. The objective of this study was to use computer simulations, flow phantom, and in vivo studies to describe and understand the effect of blood inflow on the measurement of the arterial input function. All experiments were done at 1.5 T using a typical 3D dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging sequence, and arterial input functions were extracted for each slice in the imaging volume. We simulated a set of arterial input functions based on the same imaging parameters and accounted for blood inflow and radiofrequency field inhomogeneities. Measured arterial input functions along the vessel length from both in vivo and the flow phantom agreed with simulated arterial input functions and show large overestimations in the arterial input function in the first 30 mm of the vessel, whereas arterial input functions measured more centrally achieve accurate contrast agent concentrations. Use of inflow-affected arterial input functions in tracer kinetic modeling shows potential errors of up to 80% in tissue microvascular parameters. These errors emphasize the importance of careful placement of the arterial input function definition location to avoid the effects of blood inflow. Magn Reson Med, 2010. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
REFERENCES
- 1
Tofts PS,
Brix G,
Buckley DL,
Evelhoch JL,
Henderson E,
Knopp MV,
Larsson HB,
Lee TY,
Mayr NA,
Parker GJ,
Port RE,
Taylor J,
Weisskoff RM.
Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols.
J Magn Reson Imaging
1999;
10:
223–232.
10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199909)10:3<223::AID-JMRI2>3.0.CO;2-S CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 2
A Jackson,
D Buckley,
G Parker, editors.
Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in oncology,
1st ed.
Berlin:
Springer;
2005.
311p.
10.1007/b137553 Google Scholar
- 3 Rose CJ, Mills S, O'Connor JP, Buonaccorsi GA, Roberts C, Watson Y, Whitcher B, Jayson G, Jackson A, Parker GJ. Quantifying heterogeneity in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameter maps. Proc Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2007; 10( Part 2): 376–384.
- 4 O'Connor JP, Jayson GC, Jackson A, Ghiorghiu D, Carrington BM, Rose CJ, Mills SJ, Swindell R, Roberts C, Mitchell CL, Parker GJ. Enhancing fraction predicts clinical outcome following first-line chemotherapy in patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 6130–6135.
- 5 Leach MO, Brindle KM, Evelhoch JL, Griffiths JR, Horsman MR, Jackson A, Jayson GC, Judson IR, Knopp MV, Maxwell RJ, McIntyre D, Padhani AR, Price P, Rathbone R, Rustin GJ, Tofts PS, Tozer GM, Vennart W, Waterton JC, Williams SR, Workman P. The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: issues and recommendations. Br J Cancer 2005; 92: 1599–1610.
- 6 Deoni SCL, Rutt BK, Peters TM. Rapid combined T-1 and T-2 mapping using gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state. Magn Reson Med 2003; 49: 515–526.
- 7 Haacke EM, Filleti CL, Gattu R, Ciulla C, Al-Bashir A, Suryanarayanan K, Li M, Latif Z, DelProposto Z, Sehgal V, Li T, Torquato V, Kanaparti R, Jiang J, Neelavalli J. New algorithm for quantifying vascular changes in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI independent of absolute T1 values. Magn Reson Med 2007; 58: 463–472.
- 8 Henderson E, McKinnon G, Lee TY, Rutt BK. A fast 3D Look-Locker method for volumetric T-1 mapping. Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 17: 1163–1171.
- 9 Morgan B, Utting JF, Higginson A, Thomas AL, Steward WP, Horsfield MA. A simple, reproducible method for monitoring the treatment of tumours using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Br J Cancer 2006; 94: 1420–1427.
- 10 Zierhut ML, Gardner JC, Spilker ME, Sharp JT, Vicini P. Kinetic modeling of contrast-enhanced MRI: an automated technique for assessing inflammation in the rheumatoid arthritis wrist. Ann Biomed Eng 2007; 35: 781–795.
- 11 Li KL, Zhu XP, Waterton J, Jackson A. Improved 3D quantitative mapping of blood volume and endothelial permeability in brain tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12: 347–357.
- 12 Wang JH, Mao WH, Qiu ML, Smith MB, Constable RT. Factors influencing flip angle mapping in MRI: RF pulse shape, slice-select gradients, off-resonance excitation, and B-o inhomogeneities. Magn Reson Med 2006; 56: 463–468.
- 13 Parker GJM, Barker GJ, Tofts PS. Accurate multislice gradient echo T-1 measurement in the presence of non-ideal RF pulse shape and RF field nonuniformity. Magn Reson Med 2001; 45: 838–845.
- 14 Malik SJ, Larkman DJ, Hajnal JV. Optimal linear combinations of array elements for B(1) mapping. Magn Reson Med 2009; 62: 902–909.
- 15 Zhang ZH, Yip CY, Grissom W, Noll DC, Boada FE, Stenger VA. Reduction of transmitter B-1 inhomogeneity with transmit SENSE slice-select pulses. Magn Reson Med 2007; 57: 842–847.
- 16 Jayson GC, Parker GJ, Mullamitha S, Valle JW, Saunders M, Broughton L, Lawrance J, Carrington B, Roberts C, Issa B, Buckley DL, Cheung S, Davies K, Watson Y, Zinkewich-Peotti K, Rolfe L, Jackson A. Blockade of platelet-derived growth factor receptor-beta by CDP860, a humanized, PEGylated di-Fab', leads to fluid accumulation and is associated with increased tumor vascularized volume. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 973–981.
- 17 Mullamitha SA, Ton NC, Parker GJ, Jackson A, Julyan PJ, Roberts C, Buonaccorsi GA, Watson Y, Davies K, Cheung S, Hope L, Valle JW, Radford JA, Lawrance J, Saunders MP, Munteanu MC, Nakada MT, Nemeth JA, Davis HM, Jiao Q, Prabhakar U, Lang Z, Corringham RE, Beckman RA, Jayson GC. Phase I evaluation of a fully human anti-alphav integrin monoclonal antibody (CNTO 95) in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 2128–2135.
- 18 Ton NC, Parker GJ, Jackson A, Mullamitha S, Buonaccorsi GA, Roberts C, Watson Y, Davies K, Cheung S, Hope L, Power F, Lawrance J, Valle J, Saunders M, Felix R, Soranson JA, Rolfe L, Zinkewich-Peotti K, Jayson GC. Phase I evaluation of CDP791, a PEGylated Di-Fab' conjugate that binds vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 7113–7118.
- 19 Parker GJ, Roberts C, Macdonald A, Buonaccorsi GA, Cheung S, Buckley DL, Jackson A, Watson Y, Davies K, Jayson GC. Experimentally-derived functional form for a population-averaged high-temporal-resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2006; 56: 993–1000.
- 20 Stanisz GJ, Odrobina EE, Pun J, Escaravage M, Graham SJ, Bronskill MJ, Henkelman RM. T1, T2 relaxation and magnetization transfer in tissue at 3T. Magn Reson Med 2005; 54: 507–512.
- 21 Vaughan JT, Garwood M, Collins CM, Liu W, DelaBarre L, Adriany G, Andersen P, Merkle H, Goebel R, Smith MB, Ugurbil K. 7T vs. 4T: RF power, homogeneity, and signal-to-noise comparison in head images. Magn Reson Med 2001; 46: 24–30.
- 22 Parker GJ, Baustert I, Tanner SF, Leach MO. Improving image quality and T(1) measurements using saturation recovery turboFLASH with an approximate K-space normalisation filter. Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 18: 157–167.
- 23 Fritz-Hansen T, Rostrup E, Larsson HB, Sondergaard L, Ring P, Henriksen O. Measurement of the arterial concentration of Gd-DTPA using MRI: a step toward quantitative perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 1996; 36: 225–231.
- 24 Tofts PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 7: 91–101.
- 25 Li KL, Jackson A. New hybrid technique for accurate and reproducible quantitation of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI data. Magn Reson Med 2003; 50: 1286–1295.
- 26 Tofts PS. Standing waves in uniform water phantoms. J Magn Reson Ser B 1994; 104: 143–147.
- 27 Peeters F, Annet L, Hermoye L, Van Beers BE. Inflow correction of hepatic perfusion measurements using T-1-weighted, fast gradient-echo, contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2004; 51: 710–717.
- 28 Barker GJ, Simmons A, Arridge SR, Tofts PS. A simple method for investigating the effects of non-uniformity of radiofrequency transmission and radiofrequency reception in MRI. Br J Radiol 1998; 71: 59–67.
- 29 Wang J, Mao W, Qiu M, Smith MB, Constable RT. Factors influencing flip angle mapping in MRI: RF pulse shape, slice-select gradients, off-resonance excitation, and B0 inhomogeneities. Magn Reson Med 2006; 56: 463–468.
- 30 Yarnykh VL. Actual flip-angle imaging in the pulsed steady state: a method for rapid three-dimensional mapping of the transmitted radiofrequency field. Magn Reson Med 2007; 57: 192–200.
- 31 Cheng HL, Wright GA. Rapid high-resolution T(1) mapping by variable flip angles: accurate and precise measurements in the presence of radiofrequency field inhomogeneity. Magn Reson Med 2006; 55: 566–574.
- 32 Buckley DL, Shurrab AE, Cheung CM, Jones AP, Mamtora H, Kalra PA. Measurement of single kidney function using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: comparison of two models in human subjects. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 1117–1123.
- 33 Wang JH, Qiu ML, Yang QX, Smith MB, Constable RT. Measurement and correction of transmitter and receiver induced nonuniformities in vivo. Magn Reson Med 2005; 53: 408–417.
- 34 Buckley DL, Parker GJ. T1 estimation using variable flip angle spoiled gradient echo for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: arterial input measurement improves accuracy in the presence of B1 error. Proceedings of the 12th Annual ISMRM, Kyoto, Japan, 2004.
- 35 Milnor WR. Hemodynamics, Vol. 13. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1982. 390p.
