AJDRAJNR - American Journal of Neuroradiology

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pattany, P.M.
Right arrow Articles by Quencer, R.M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pattany, P.M.
Right arrow Articles by Quencer, R.M.

American Journal of Neuroradiology 27:1070-1073, May 2006
© 2006 American Society of Neuroradiology

BRAIN

Quantitative Analysis of the Effects of Physiologic Brain Motion on Point-Resolved Spectroscopy

P.M. Pattany, M.G. Massand, B.C. Bowen and R.M. Quencer

From the Department of Radiology, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, Fla

Address correspondence to Pradip M. Pattany, PhD, Department of Radiology, MRI Center, University of Miami School of Medicine, 1115 NW 14th St, Miami, FL 33136

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although single-voxel proton MR spectroscopy is a noninvasive method that enables measurement of brain metabolite concentrations, it has been shown that physiologic brain motion causes inaccuracies in measurement of metabolite concentrations and increases the overall SD of the measurements when the stimulated echo acquisition mode (STEAM) is used. We tested the hypothesis that the point-resolved spectroscopy (PRESS) technique is less sensitive to physiologic brain motion than the STEAM technique.

METHODS: In 10 healthy subjects, spectra were obtained from a voxel located in the left basal ganglia by using the PRESS sequence with cardiac gating and without water suppression to assess global phase change as a function of physiologic brain motion. This was accomplished by acquiring data at various time delays from the R wave throughout the cardiac cycle. Subsequently, spectra were obtained in 10 healthy subjects by using PRESS both without and with cardiac gating, and with water suppression, to determine whether brain motion resulted in a statistically significant difference in mean and SD of measured metabolite concentration.

RESULTS: At various time delays from the R wave throughout the cardiac cycle, no significant global phase difference was noted in water signal intensity. In addition, when PRESS data were obtained both without and with cardiac gating (by using an optimal delay obtained from previously published data by using STEAM), no significant difference was seen in measured metabolite concentrations and SDs.

CONCLUSION: The PRESS technique is relatively insensitive to physiologic brain motion.






Copyright © 2009 by the American Society of Neuroradiology. Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X