Gavin Hamilton, Nicole A Gamboa, Alex N Schlein, Sheida Ebrahimi, Summer J Batasin, Hon Yu, Stephan Jordan, Breanna Hill, Catherine Moran, Ana E Rodriguez Soto, Rebecca Rakow-Penner
{"title":"Multi-Parameter Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy in Cervix.","authors":"Gavin Hamilton, Nicole A Gamboa, Alex N Schlein, Sheida Ebrahimi, Summer J Batasin, Hon Yu, Stephan Jordan, Breanna Hill, Catherine Moran, Ana E Rodriguez Soto, Rebecca Rakow-Penner","doi":"10.1002/nbm.70211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study is to examine cervix-adapted versions of steady-state multi-parameter MRS (SMP MRS) and flip-angle-corrected multi-parameter MRS (CMP MRS), comparing estimated cervix T1<sub>w</sub> and T2<sub>w</sub> for the two sequences. CMP MRS and SMP MRS were adapted from liver versions of the sequences, adding long TR acquisitions to better estimate cervix T1<sub>w</sub>. CMP MRS differs from SMP MRS by correcting for inaccurate B1 calibration. Both CMP MRS and SMP MRS were acquired at 3 T in 13 adult female subjects (10 healthy, 3 with cancer). Values of T1<sub>w</sub> and T2<sub>w</sub> were estimated from both sequences, and the relationship between the values was examined. While there was no significant difference in T1<sub>w</sub> given by the two sequences (CMP T1<sub>w</sub> = 1568 ms, SMP T1<sub>w</sub> = 1571 ms, p = 0.95; SMP T1<sub>w</sub> = 0.657 CMP T1<sub>w</sub> + 541 ms, r = 0.36), there was a single case where SMP MRS underestimated T1<sub>w</sub> by over 400 ms. A significant difference was observed in T2<sub>w</sub> (CMP T2<sub>w</sub> = 39.9 ms, SMP T2<sub>w</sub> = 45.6 ms, p = 0.001; SMP T2<sub>w</sub> = 0.812 CMP T2<sub>w</sub> + 13.3 ms, r = 0.87). Cervix adapted CMP MRS and SMP MRS both successfully estimated values of T1<sub>w</sub> and T2<sub>w</sub>, though the single case where SMP MRS gave a non-physical T1<sub>w</sub> suggests CMP MRS may be better suited for cervix T1<sub>w</sub> estimation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19309,"journal":{"name":"NMR in Biomedicine","volume":"39 1","pages":"e70211"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NMR in Biomedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.70211","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine cervix-adapted versions of steady-state multi-parameter MRS (SMP MRS) and flip-angle-corrected multi-parameter MRS (CMP MRS), comparing estimated cervix T1w and T2w for the two sequences. CMP MRS and SMP MRS were adapted from liver versions of the sequences, adding long TR acquisitions to better estimate cervix T1w. CMP MRS differs from SMP MRS by correcting for inaccurate B1 calibration. Both CMP MRS and SMP MRS were acquired at 3 T in 13 adult female subjects (10 healthy, 3 with cancer). Values of T1w and T2w were estimated from both sequences, and the relationship between the values was examined. While there was no significant difference in T1w given by the two sequences (CMP T1w = 1568 ms, SMP T1w = 1571 ms, p = 0.95; SMP T1w = 0.657 CMP T1w + 541 ms, r = 0.36), there was a single case where SMP MRS underestimated T1w by over 400 ms. A significant difference was observed in T2w (CMP T2w = 39.9 ms, SMP T2w = 45.6 ms, p = 0.001; SMP T2w = 0.812 CMP T2w + 13.3 ms, r = 0.87). Cervix adapted CMP MRS and SMP MRS both successfully estimated values of T1w and T2w, though the single case where SMP MRS gave a non-physical T1w suggests CMP MRS may be better suited for cervix T1w estimation.
期刊介绍:
NMR in Biomedicine is a journal devoted to the publication of original full-length papers, rapid communications and review articles describing the development of magnetic resonance spectroscopy or imaging methods or their use to investigate physiological, biochemical, biophysical or medical problems. Topics for submitted papers should be in one of the following general categories: (a) development of methods and instrumentation for MR of biological systems; (b) studies of normal or diseased organs, tissues or cells; (c) diagnosis or treatment of disease. Reports may cover work on patients or healthy human subjects, in vivo animal experiments, studies of isolated organs or cultured cells, analysis of tissue extracts, NMR theory, experimental techniques, or instrumentation.