多发性硬化症病变动态敏感性对比灌注成像不同后处理算法的比较:峰值时间分析

L. Monti, D. Momi, Tommaso Casseri, Davide Del Roscio, M. Bellini, Alessandro Rossi
{"title":"多发性硬化症病变动态敏感性对比灌注成像不同后处理算法的比较:峰值时间分析","authors":"L. Monti, D. Momi, Tommaso Casseri, Davide Del Roscio, M. Bellini, Alessandro Rossi","doi":"10.33696/neurol.2.049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate, in multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions, the diagnostic performance of two different commercial post-processing MR perfusion software. These two different algorithms for processing Dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion images have been used to differentiate perfusion values among white matter (WM) lesions, normal appearing white matter (NAWM), and grey matter (GM) in MS. The diagnostic performance for diff erentiating among lesions and normal tissue has been measured with respect to the Time to Peak (TTP). Methods and analysis: Analysing DSC perfusion imaging, a retrospective study has been performed on 74 MS patients and 15 normal subjects, by using 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner. TTP maps were generated by using 2 different commercially available algorithms (A;B). Analysis was conducted for the evaluation of diagnostic performance of different algorithms for differentiating between lesions and normal appearing WM and GM. Results: A statistically significant difference between the two algorithms was demonstrated by comparing TTP values among recent, stable lesions and NAWM. TTP values have been used to discriminate among recent, stable lesions and NAWM by using two different software packages. Conclusion: The optimal software should be that which increases the temporal resolution and be not operator dependent. TTP has been able to 1) examine the variability in the quantitative results of DSC MR perfusion imaging generated from identical source data of MS patients, 2) to identify the variables between two commercial post-processing algorithm and 3) to focus on the crucial role of post-processing inter-vendor differences.","PeriodicalId":73744,"journal":{"name":"Journal of experimental neurology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Different Post-Processing Algorithms for Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Perfusion Imaging of Multiple Sclerosis Lesions: A Time to Peak Analysis\",\"authors\":\"L. Monti, D. Momi, Tommaso Casseri, Davide Del Roscio, M. Bellini, Alessandro Rossi\",\"doi\":\"10.33696/neurol.2.049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate, in multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions, the diagnostic performance of two different commercial post-processing MR perfusion software. These two different algorithms for processing Dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion images have been used to differentiate perfusion values among white matter (WM) lesions, normal appearing white matter (NAWM), and grey matter (GM) in MS. The diagnostic performance for diff erentiating among lesions and normal tissue has been measured with respect to the Time to Peak (TTP). Methods and analysis: Analysing DSC perfusion imaging, a retrospective study has been performed on 74 MS patients and 15 normal subjects, by using 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner. TTP maps were generated by using 2 different commercially available algorithms (A;B). Analysis was conducted for the evaluation of diagnostic performance of different algorithms for differentiating between lesions and normal appearing WM and GM. Results: A statistically significant difference between the two algorithms was demonstrated by comparing TTP values among recent, stable lesions and NAWM. TTP values have been used to discriminate among recent, stable lesions and NAWM by using two different software packages. Conclusion: The optimal software should be that which increases the temporal resolution and be not operator dependent. TTP has been able to 1) examine the variability in the quantitative results of DSC MR perfusion imaging generated from identical source data of MS patients, 2) to identify the variables between two commercial post-processing algorithm and 3) to focus on the crucial role of post-processing inter-vendor differences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of experimental neurology\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of experimental neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33696/neurol.2.049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of experimental neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33696/neurol.2.049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估两种不同的商业后处理MR灌注软件对多发性硬化症(MS)病变的诊断性能。这两种不同的动态磁化率对比(DSC)灌注图像处理算法已被用于区分MS中白质(WM)病变、正常白质(NAWM)和灰质(GM)之间的灌注值。关于峰值时间(TTP),测量了病变和正常组织之间的差异诊断性能。方法与分析:通过分析DSC灌注成像,使用1.5特斯拉MRI扫描仪对74名MS患者和15名正常人进行了回顾性研究。TTP图是通过使用2种不同的市售算法生成的(A;B)。对区分病变和正常表现的WM和GM的不同算法的诊断性能进行了分析。结果:通过比较近期稳定病变和NAWM的TTP值,证明了两种算法之间的统计学显著差异。TTP值已被用于通过使用两个不同的软件包来区分近期稳定病变和NAWM。结论:最佳软件应该是提高时间分辨率并且不依赖于操作员的软件。TTP已经能够1)检查由MS患者的相同源数据生成的DSC MR灌注成像的定量结果的可变性,2)识别两种商业后处理算法之间的变量,3)关注后处理供应商间差异的关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Different Post-Processing Algorithms for Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Perfusion Imaging of Multiple Sclerosis Lesions: A Time to Peak Analysis
Objective: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate, in multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions, the diagnostic performance of two different commercial post-processing MR perfusion software. These two different algorithms for processing Dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion images have been used to differentiate perfusion values among white matter (WM) lesions, normal appearing white matter (NAWM), and grey matter (GM) in MS. The diagnostic performance for diff erentiating among lesions and normal tissue has been measured with respect to the Time to Peak (TTP). Methods and analysis: Analysing DSC perfusion imaging, a retrospective study has been performed on 74 MS patients and 15 normal subjects, by using 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner. TTP maps were generated by using 2 different commercially available algorithms (A;B). Analysis was conducted for the evaluation of diagnostic performance of different algorithms for differentiating between lesions and normal appearing WM and GM. Results: A statistically significant difference between the two algorithms was demonstrated by comparing TTP values among recent, stable lesions and NAWM. TTP values have been used to discriminate among recent, stable lesions and NAWM by using two different software packages. Conclusion: The optimal software should be that which increases the temporal resolution and be not operator dependent. TTP has been able to 1) examine the variability in the quantitative results of DSC MR perfusion imaging generated from identical source data of MS patients, 2) to identify the variables between two commercial post-processing algorithm and 3) to focus on the crucial role of post-processing inter-vendor differences.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信