Control
Labeled
Perfusion
Control
Labeled
Figure 2: Flow-Sensitive Alternating Inversion Recovery (FAIR) labeling diagram
Figure 2: Flow-Sensitive Alternating Inversion Recovery (FAIR) labeling diagram
Control
Labeled
“When I started working in the MR field, I got interested in a method to measure perfusion called Arterial Spin Labeling or ASL. The amazing aspect is that, from the start, ASL was a method able to be quantitative. However, nearly 30 years after the first two papers[1-2], while it has finally made it into the clinic, ASL is still quite not used as a quantitative imaging method. The measurement of the cerebral blood flow as a physiological parameter is still left unresolved. While all manufacturers sell ASL as a “quantitative” method, it is not exactly as such in FDA’s definition, because of the lack of any reference standard to be compared to. This means that in case of systematic error, there is no way to actually assess it. For that reason, I have been trying to move ASL more and more into its quantitative potential. First, by working on different methodologies like QUASAR for example, which measures all aspects of the ASL signal and uses a model-free estimate of the perfusion[3]. Beyond that, we were the first in Singapore to publish results of a very large test-retest study, trying to show that we could actually achieve measurements with a reasonable precision[4]. Again, we could not compare ASL to a gold standard, but we could at least demonstrate in individual healthy volunteers the extent of the confidence interval for the parameters’ measurement. However, we still did not know whether there was a systematic bias in the quantification of perfusion with ASL.”
“Quantification is important for one major reason. If any measurement of any physiological parameter is performed over time in a patient in a longitudinal study, we have to be able to demonstrate that a change observed between time-point A and time-point B is due to a change in the patient physiology and not a result from the imprecision of the method – where the bias might have varied between the first and the second observation.The only way to assess this conclusion is to have a reference standard. For most applications, if we are measuring a static parameter, it is relatively easy to make a standard. If we know a bit of chemistry, we can create standards usually called phantoms in MRI. By scanning them repeatedly, we can assess how stable the measurements are over time. The analysis of that stability can be considered for the quantification, in order to separate the effect resulting from the measuring device, in this case the MR scanner, from the patient. For that reason, 5 years ago, we founded a company to develop a quantitative standard for imaging. The aim was to be able to disentangle the differences between measurements at 2 time-points, potentially linked to degradation of the device on the one side, or degradation of the state of the patient on the other side. Our first product was addressing ASL quantification with the development of a dedicated perfusion phantom, a very complex and expensive system. Its use is so far mostly restricted to large research centers that cannot only test the quality of their equipment, but also develop their own sequences. We also produced a series of other simpler phantoms for measuring static aspects. Since our company was founded, others followed soon; there are now probably half a dozen companies providing MRI phantoms for this particular niche aspect, i.e. making sure that measurements are quantitative and reproducible. If we were the first ones providing phantoms for functional parameters, companies dating back from the 1980s provided calibration standards for T1 and T2 measurement.”
Xavier Golay, PhD.
References
1 Williams DS, Detre JA, Leigh JS, Koretsky AP. Magnetic resonance imaging of perfusion using spin inversion of arterial water. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1992;89(1):212-216.
2 Detre JA, Leigh JS, Williams DS, Koretsky AP. Perfusion imaging. Magnetic resonance in medicine. 1992; 23(1):37-45.
3 Petersen ET, Lim T, Golay X. Model-free arterial spin labeling quantification approach for perfusion MRI. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine: An Official Journal of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2006;55(2):219-232.
4 Petersen ET, Mouridsen K, Golay X. The QUASAR reproducibility study, Part II: Results from a multi-center Arterial Spin Labeling test–retest study. Neuroimage. 2010;49(1):104-113.
The information on this website is not intended for consumers. It is directed exclusively for healthcare professionals and persons who are engaging in purchasing or the business of wholesaling therapeutic goods (in accordance with the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code Instrument 2021).
By selecting “Continue” you are indicating that you are the intended audience. Click “Cancel” to be redirected to the Canon Medical Systems global website.
© Canon Medical Systems ANZ Pty Limited.
© Canon Medical Systems ANZ Pty Limited.