Inter-Vendor Reproducibility of Pseudo-Continuous Arterial Spin Labeling at 3 Tesla |
| |
Authors: | Henri J M M Mutsaerts Rebecca M E Steketee Dennis F R Heijtel Joost P A Kuijer Matthias J P van Osch Charles B L M Majoie Marion Smits Aart J Nederveen |
| |
Institution: | 1. Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; 2. Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.; 3. Department of Physics and Medical Technology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; 4. C. J. Gorter Center for High Field MRI, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.; University of Texas at Dallas, United States of America, |
| |
Abstract: | PurposePrior to the implementation of arterial spin labeling (ASL) in clinical multi-center studies, it is important to establish its status quo inter-vendor reproducibility. This study evaluates and compares the intra- and inter-vendor reproducibility of pseudo-continuous ASL (pCASL) as clinically implemented by GE and Philips.Material and Methods22 healthy volunteers were scanned twice on both a 3T GE and a 3T Philips scanner. The main difference in implementation between the vendors was the readout module: spiral 3D fast spin echo vs. 2D gradient-echo echo-planar imaging respectively. Mean and variation of cerebral blood flow (CBF) were compared for the total gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM), and on a voxel-level.ResultsWhereas the mean GM CBF of both vendors was almost equal (p = 1.0), the mean WM CBF was significantly different (p<0.01). The inter-vendor GM variation did not differ from the intra-vendor GM variation (p = 0.3 and p = 0.5 for GE and Philips respectively). Spatial inter-vendor CBF and variation differences were observed in several GM regions and in the WM.ConclusionThese results show that total GM CBF-values can be exchanged between vendors. For the inter-vendor comparison of GM regions or WM, these results encourage further standardization of ASL implementation among vendors. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|