Bayesian Estimation of Cerebral Perfusion Using Reduced-Contrast-Dose Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Perfusion at 3T

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   2. Lansberg MG,
   3. Straka M,
   4. Kemp S, et al

   . MRI profile and response to endovascular reperfusion after stroke (DEFUSE 2): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2012;11:860–67

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Albers GW,
   3. Thijs VN,
   4. Wechsler L, et al

   . Magnetic resonance imaging profiles predict clinical response to early reperfusion: the diffusion and perfusion imaging evaluation for understanding stroke evolution (DEFUSE) study. Ann Neurol 2006;60:508–17

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   2. Davis SM,
   3. Donnan GA,
   4. Parsons MW, et al

   . Effects of alteplase beyond 3 h after stroke in the Echoplanar Imaging Thrombolytic Evaluation Trial (EPITHET): a placebo-controlled randomised trial. Lancet Neurol 2008;7:299–309

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Hu LS,
   3. Baxter LC,
   4. Pinnaduwage DS, et al

   . Optimized preload leakage-correction methods to improve the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging in posttreatment gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:40–48

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   2. Law M,
   3. Yang S,
   4. Babb JS, et al

   . Comparison of cerebral blood volume and vascular permeability from dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with glioma grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:746–55

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   2. Alger JR,
   3. Schaewe TJ,
   4. Lai TC, et al

   . Contrast agent dose effects in cerebral dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance perfusion imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;29:52–64

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. Ryu CW,
   3. Lee DH,
   4. Kim HS, et al

   . Acquisition of MR perfusion images and contrast-enhanced MR angiography in acute ischaemic stroke patients: which procedure should be done first? Br J Radiol 2006;79:962–67

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Nael K,
   3. Meshksar A,
   4. Ellingson B, et al

   . Combined low-dose contrast-enhanced MR angiography and perfusion for acute ischemic stroke at 3T: a more efficient stroke protocol. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1078–84

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Armitage PA,
   3. Schwindack C,
   4. Bastin ME, et al

   . Quantitative assessment of intracranial tumor response to dexamethasone using diffusion, perfusion and permeability magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25:303–10

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    2. Weber MA,
    3. Zoubaa S,
    4. Schlieter M, et al

    . Diagnostic performance of spectroscopic and perfusion MRI for distinction of brain tumors. Neurology 2006;66:1899–906

    CrossRef
11. 11.↵
    2. Kanal E,
    3. Barkovich AJ,
    4. Bell C, et al

    . ACR guidance document for safe MR practices: 2007. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:1447–74

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    2. Heiland S,
    3. Reith W,
    4. Forsting M, et al

    . How do concentration and dosage of the contrast agent affect the signal change in perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging? A computer simulation. Magn Reson Imaging 2001;19:813–20

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Wirestam R,
    3. Thilmann O,
    4. Knutsson L, et al

    . Comparison of quantitative dynamic susceptibility-contrast MRI perfusion estimates obtained using different contrast-agent administration schemes at 3T. Eur J Radiol 2010;75:e86–91

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Manka C,
    3. Traber F,
    4. Gieseke J, et al

    . Three-dimensional dynamic susceptibility-weighted perfusion MR imaging at 3.0 T: feasibility and contrast agent dose. Radiology 2005;234:869–77

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    2. Alger JR,
    3. Schaewe TJ,
    4. Liebeskind DS, et al

    . On the feasibility of reduced dose dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MRI for stroke. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Montréal, Québec, Canada. May 6–13, 2011
16. 16.↵
    2. Østergaard L,
    3. Weisskoff RM,
    4. Chesler DA, et al

    . High resolution measurement of cerebral blood flow using intravascular tracer bolus passages. Part I: mathematical approach and statistical analysis. Magn Reson Med 1996;36:715–25

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    2. Carpenter TK,
    3. Armitage PA,
    4. Bastin ME, et al

    . DSC perfusion MRI-quantification and reduction of systematic errors arising in areas of reduced cerebral blood flow. Magn Reson Med 2006;55:1342–49

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Boutelier T,
    3. Kudo K,
    4. Pautot F, et al

    . Bayesian hemodynamic parameter estimation by bolus tracking perfusion weighted imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2012;31:1381–95

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Wu O,
    3. Østergaard L,
    4. Weisskoff RM, et al

    . Tracer arrival timing-insensitive technique for estimating flow in MR perfusion-weighted imaging using singular value decomposition with a block-circulant deconvolution matrix. Magn Reson Med 2003;50:164–74

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    2. Mouridsen K,
    3. Christensen S,
    4. Gyldensted L, et al

    . Automatic selection of arterial input function using cluster analysis. Magn Reson Med Mar 2006;55:524–31

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. DeLano MC,
    3. Fisher C

    . 3T MR imaging of the brain. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006;14:77–88

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Patil V,
    3. Jensen JH,
    4. Johnson G

    . Intravascular contrast agent T2 (*) relaxivity in brain tissue. NMR Biomed 2013;26:392–99

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Andersen IK,
    3. Szymkowiak A,
    4. Rasmussen CE, et al

    . Perfusion quantification using Gaussian process deconvolution. Magn Reson Med 2002;48:351–61

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Sasaki M,
    3. Kudo K,
    4. Boutelier T, et al

    . Assessment of the accuracy of a Bayesian estimation algorithm for perfusion CT by using a digital phantom. Neuroradiology 2013;55:1197–203

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Mouridsen K,
    3. Friston K,
    4. Hjort N, et al

    . Bayesian estimation of cerebral perfusion using a physiological model of microvasculature. Neuroimage 2006;33:570–79

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    2. Leenders KL,
    3. Perani D,
    4. Lammertsma AA, et al

    . Cerebral blood flow, blood volume and oxygen utilization: normal values and effect of age. Brain 1990;113:27–47

    Abstract/FREE Full Text