ArticleNMR in biomedicine2022
Subject-specific optimization of background suppression for arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging using a feedback loop on the scanner.
Article in NMR in biomedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background suppression (BGS) in arterial spin labeling (ASL) magnetic resonance imaging leads to a higher temporal signal-to-noise ratio (tSNR) of the perfusion images compared with ASL without BGS. The performance of the BGS, however, depends on the tissue relaxation times and on inhomogeneities of the scanner's magnetic fields, which differ between subjects and are unknown at the moment of scanning. Therefore, we developed a feedback loop (FBL) mechanism that optimizes the BGS for each subject in the scanner during acquisition. We implemented the FBL for 2D pseudo-continuous ASL scans with an echo-planar imaging readout. After each dynamic scan, the acquired ASL images were automatically sent to an external computer and processed with a Python processing tool. Inversion times were optimized on the fly using 80 iterations of the Nelder-Mead method, by minimizing the signal intensity in the label image while maximizing the signal intensity in the perfusion image. The performance of this method was first tested in a four-component phantom. The regularization parameter was then tuned in six healthy subjects (three males, three females, age 24-62 years) and set as λ = 4 for all other experiments. The resulting ASL images, perfusion images, and tSNR maps obtained from the last 20 iterations of the FBL scan were compared with those obtained without BGS and with standard BGS in 12 healthy volunteers (five males, seven females, age 24-62 years) (including the six volunteers used for tuning of λ). The FBL resulted in perfusion images with a statistically significantly higher tSNR (2.20) compared with standard BGS (1.96) (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.