Renal plasma flow (RPF) measured with multiple-inversion-time arterial spin labeling (ASL) and tracer kinetic analysis: Validation against a dynamic contrast enhancement method

Abstract Purpose To propose and validate a method for accurately quantifying renal plasma flow (RPF) with arterial spin labeling (ASL). Materials and methods The proposed method employs a tracer-kinetic approach and derives perfusion from the slope of the ASL difference signal sampled at multiple in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Magnetic resonance imaging 2017-04, Vol.37, p.51-55
Main Authors: Conlin, Christopher C, Oesingmann, Niels, Bolster, Bradley, Huang, Yufeng, Lee, Vivian S, Zhang, Jeff L
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Arterial spin labeling
Arteries
Contrast Media
Female
Gadolinium - pharmacology
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Kinetics
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Male
Middle Aged
Perfusion
Radiology
Renal perfusion
Renal Plasma Flow
Reproducibility of Results
Spin Labels
Tracer kinetic analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Purpose To propose and validate a method for accurately quantifying renal plasma flow (RPF) with arterial spin labeling (ASL). Materials and methods The proposed method employs a tracer-kinetic approach and derives perfusion from the slope of the ASL difference signal sampled at multiple inversion-times (TIs). To validate the method's accuracy, we performed a HIPAA-compliant and IRB-approved study with 15 subjects (9 male, 6 female; age range 24–73) to compare RPF estimates obtained from ASL to those from a more established dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI method. We also investigated the impact of TI-sampling density on the accuracy of estimated RPF. Results Good agreement was found between ASL- and DCE-measured RPF, with a mean difference of 9 ± 30 ml/min and a correlation coefficient R = 0.92 when ASL signals were acquired at 16 TIs and a mean difference of 9 ± 57 ml/min and R = 0.81 when ASL signals were acquired at 5 TIs. RPF estimated from ASL signals acquired at only 2 TIs (400 and 1200 ms) showed a low correlation with DCE-measured values ( R = 0.30). Conclusion The proposed ASL method is capable of measuring RPF with an accuracy that is comparable to DCE MRI. At least 5 TIs are recommended for the ASL acquisition to ensure reliability of RPF measurements.
ISSN:0730-725X
1873-5894
DOI:10.1016/j.mri.2016.11.010