Neuroradiology

Quantification of Blood Flow in Brain Tumors: Comparison of Arterial Spin Labeling and Dynamic Susceptibility-weighted Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging

Abstract

PURPOSE: To implement an arterial spin labeling technique that is feasible in routine examinations and to test the method and compare it with dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for evaluation of tumor blood flow (TBF) in patients with brain tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with histologically proven brain tumors were examined at 1.5 T. A second version of quantitative imaging of perfusion by using a single subtraction with addition of thin-section periodic saturation after inversion and a time delay (Q2TIPS) technique of pulsed arterial spin labeling in the multisection mode was implemented. After arterial spin labeling, a combined T2- and T2*-weighted first-pass bolus perfusion study (gadopentetate dimeglumine, 0.2 mmol/kg) was performed by using a double-echo echo-planar imaging sequence. In regions of interest, maps of absolute and relative cerebral blood flow were computed and analyzed with arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging, respectively.

RESULTS: Both techniques yielded the highest perfusion values in imaging of glioblastomas and the lowest values in imaging of two low-grade gliomas that both showed strong gadopentetate dimeglumine enhancement. There was a close linear correlation between dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging and arterial spin labeling in the tumor region of interest (linear regression coefficient, R = 0.83; P < .005). Blood flow is underestimated with arterial spin labeling at low flow rates. High- and low-grade gliomas can be distinguished at the same level of significance with both methods. Absolute TBF is less important for tumor grading than is the ratio of TBF to age-dependent mean brain perfusion.

CONCLUSION: Arterial spin labeling is a suitable method for assessment of microvascular perfusion and allows distinction between high- and low-grade gliomas.

References

1 Kleihues P, Burger P, Scheithauer B. Histological typing of tumors of the central nervous system 2nd ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1993. Google Scholar
2 Daumas D, Scheithauer B, O’Fallon J, Kelly P. Grading of astrocytomas: a simple and reproducible method. Cancer 1988; 62:2152-2165. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
3 Burger PC. Revising the World Health Organization (WHO) Blue Book: “Histological typing of tumours of the central nervous system”. J Neurooncol 1995; 24:3-7. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
4 Folkman J. What is evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989; 82:4-6. Google Scholar
5 Barker F, Chang S, Huhn S. Age and the risk of anaplasia in magnetic resonance non-enhancening supratentorial cerebral tumors. Cancer 1997; 80:936-941. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
6 Chamberlain M, Murovic J, Levin V. Absent of contrast enhancement on CT brain scans of patients with supratentorial malignant gliomas. Neurology 1988; 38:1371-1374. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
7 Uematsu H, Maeda M, Satado N, et al. Blood volume of gliomas determined by double-echo dynamic perfusion-weighted MR imaging: a preliminary study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001; 22:1915-1919. Medline, Google Scholar
8 Knopp E, Cha S, Johnson G, et al. Glial Neoplasms: dynamic contrast-enhanced T2*-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 1999; 211:791-798. Link, Google Scholar
9 Lev M, Rosen B. Clinical applications of intracranial perfusion MR imaging. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 1999; 9:309-331. Medline, Google Scholar
10 Le Bas J, Kremer S, Grand S, et al. NMR perfusion imaging: applications to the study of brain tumor angiogenesis. Bull Acad Natl Med 2000; 184:557-567. Medline, Google Scholar
11 Roberts H, Roberts T, Bollen A, Ley S, Brasch R, Dillon W. Correlation of microvascular permeability derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with histologic grade and tumor labeling index: a study in human brain tumors. Acad Radiol 2001; 8:384-391. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
12 Ostergaard L, Johannsen P, Host-Poulsen P, et al. Cerebral blood flow measurements by magnetic resonance imaging bolus tracking: comparison with [(15)O]H2O positron emission tomography in humans. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1998; 18:935-940. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
13 Roberts H, Roberts T, Brasch R, Dillon W. Quantitative measurement of microvascular permeability in human brain tumors achieved using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging: correlation with histologic grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21:891-899. Medline, Google Scholar
14 Aronen H, Gazit I, Louis D, et al. Cerebral blood volume maps of gliomas: comparison with tumor grade and histologic findings. Radiology 1994; 191:41-51. Link, Google Scholar
15 Fisel CR, Ackerman JL, Buxton RB, et al. MR contrast due to microscopically heterogeneous magnetic susceptibility: numerical simulations and applications to cerebral physiology. Magn Reson Med 1991; 17:336-347. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
16 Donahue K, Krouwer H, Rand S, et al. Utility of simultaneously acquired gradient-echo and spin-echo cerebral blood volume and morphology maps in brain tumor patients. Magn Reson Med 2000; 43:845-853. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
17 Buxton RB, Frank LR, Wong EC, Siewert B, Warach S, Edelman RR. A general kinetic model for quantitative perfusion imaging with arterial spin labeling. Magn Reson Med 1998; 40:383-396. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
18 Silva A, Kim S, Garwood M. Imaging blood flow in brain tumors using arterial spin labeling. Magn Reson Med 2000; 44:169-173. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
19 Gaa J, Warach S, Wen P, Thangaraj V, Wielopolski P, Edelman RR. Noninvasive perfusion imaging of human brain tumors with EPISTAR. Eur Radiol 1996; 6:518-522. Medline, Google Scholar
20 Luh WM, Wong EC, Bandettini PA, Hyde JS. QUIPSS II with thin-slice TI1 periodic saturation: a method for improving accuracy of quantitative perfusion imaging using pulsed arterial spin labeling. Magn Reson Med 1999; 41:1246-1254. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
21 Silver MS, Joseph RI, Hoult DI. Selective spin inversion in nuclear magnetic resonance and coherent optics through an exact solution of the Bloch-Riccati equation. Phys Rev A 1985; 31:2753-2755. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
22 Wong EC, Buxton RB, Frank LR. Quantitative imaging of perfusion using a single subtraction (QUIPSS and QUIPSS II). Magn Reson Med 1998; 39:702-708. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
23 Ostergaard L, Weisskoff RM, Chesler DA, Gyldensted C, Rosen BR. High resolution measurement of cerebral blood flow using intravascular tracer bolus passages. I. Mathematical approach and statistical analysis. Magn Reson Med 1996; 36:715-725. Google Scholar
24 Simonsen CZ, Ostergaard L, Smith DF, Vestergaard-Poulsen P, Gyldensted C. Comparison of gradient- and spin-echo imaging: CBF, CBV, and MTT measurements by bolus tracking. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12:411-416. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
25 Thomas DL, Lythgoe MF, Calamante F, Gadian DG, Ordidge RJ. Simultaneous noninvasive measurement of CBF and CBV using double-echo FAIR (DEFAIR). Magn Reson Med 2001; 45:853-863. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
26 St Lawrence KS, Frank JA, McLaughlin AC. Effect of restricted water exchange on cerebral blood flow values calculated with arterial spin tagging: a theoretical investigation. Magn Reson Med 2000; 44:440-449. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
27 Gunther M, Bock M, Schad LR. Arterial spin labeling in combination with a look-locker sampling strategy: inflow turbo-sampling EPI-FAIR (ITS-FAIR). Magn Reson Med 2001; 46:974-984. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar

Article History

Published in print: Aug 2003

Vol. 228, No. 2

Metrics

Downloaded 1,772 times

Altmetric Score