Abnormalities of the contrast re‐circulation phase in cerebral tumors demonstrated using dynamic susceptibility contrast‐enhanced imaging: A possible marker of vascular tortuosity

Dynamic susceptibility contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in tumors is restricted by relaxivity effects, which may obscure any abnormality of first‐pass kinetics in the re‐circulation phase. The purposes of this study were a) to document the magnitude of relaxivity effects with a variety of commonly used MR susceptibility imaging techniques; and b) to determine whether the re‐circulation phase of the first‐pass curve in tumors differs from that in normal tissue. We have confirmed that residual relaxivity effects can be eliminated from dynamic susceptibility contrast‐enhanced data by several techniques. Application of these methods to enhancing vascular tumors allows detection of abnormalities in the re‐circulation phase, which would otherwise be obscured. These abnormalities are independent of relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and presumably represent deviations from the predicted gamma variat flow pattern seen in normal tissues. We believe that the parameter rR described here provides an indicator of the chaotic nature of neovascular angiogenesis, which may be of benefit in diagnosis and management. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2000;11:103–113. © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  Christian Streffer,et al.  Morphological Aspects of Tumor Angiogenesis and Microcirculation , 2000 .

[2]  B R Rosen,et al.  NMR imaging of changes in vascular morphology due to tumor angiogenesis , 1998, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[3]  T Hackländer,et al.  Comparison of cerebral blood volume measurements using the T1 and T2* methods in normal human brains and brain tumors. , 1997, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[4]  B. Rosen,et al.  Signal‐to‐noise analysis of cerebral blood volume maps from dynamic NMR imaging studies , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[5]  C K Kuhl,et al.  Breast neoplasms: T2* susceptibility-contrast, first-pass perfusion MR imaging. , 1997, Radiology.

[6]  K Sartor,et al.  Accuracy of gamma-variate fits to concentration-time curves from dynamic susceptibility-contrast enhanced MRI: influence of time resolution, maximal signal drop and signal-to-noise. , 1997, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[7]  W T Yuh,et al.  Assessment of tumor microcirculation: A new role of dynamic contrast MR imaging , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[8]  T. Miyati,et al.  Dual dynamic contrast‐enhanced MR imaging , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[9]  T Hackländer,et al.  Cerebral blood volume maps with dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted FLASH imaging: normal values and preliminary clinical results. , 1996, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[10]  B. Rosen,et al.  Echo-planar MR cerebral blood volume mapping of gliomas. Clinical utility. , 1996, Acta radiologica.

[11]  P. Renshaw,et al.  Sequential dynamic susceptibility contrast MR experiments in human brain: Residual contrast agent effect, steady state, and hemodynamic perturbation , 1995, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[12]  Bruce R. Rosen,et al.  Echo-Planar MR Cerebral Blood Volume Mapping of Gliomas , 1995 .

[13]  A Horsman,et al.  Quantitative analysis of multi‐slice Gd‐DTPA enhanced dynamic MR images using an automated simplex minimization procedure , 1994, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[14]  K. Yamamoto,et al.  Vascularity of meningiomas and neuromas: assessment with dynamic susceptibility-contrast MR imaging. , 1994, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  E F Halpern,et al.  Cerebral blood volume maps of gliomas: comparison with tumor grade and histologic findings. , 1994, Radiology.

[16]  P. Gowland,et al.  Dynamic studies of gadolinium uptake in brain tumors using inversion‐recovery echo‐planar imaging , 1992, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[17]  Guoying Liu,et al.  A fast gradient‐recalled MRI technique with increased sensitivity to dynamic susceptibility effects , 1992, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[18]  B. Rosen,et al.  Susceptibility contrast imaging of cerebral blood volume: Human experience , 1991, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[19]  Mark S. Cohen,et al.  Contrast agents and cerebral hemodynamics , 1991, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[20]  P. Mansfield,et al.  Dynamic imaging of contrast enhancement in brain tumors , 1991, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[21]  P. Tofts,et al.  Measurement of the blood‐brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts , 1991, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[22]  R R Edelman,et al.  Cerebral blood flow: assessment with dynamic contrast-enhanced T2*-weighted MR imaging at 1.5 T. , 1990, Radiology.

[23]  B. Rosen,et al.  Perfusion imaging with NMR contrast agents , 1990, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[24]  F. A. Seiler,et al.  Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing , 1989 .

[25]  R. Davenport The derivation of the gamma-variate relationship for tracer dilution curves. , 1983, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[26]  J. Folkman,et al.  Tumor angiogenesis: a quantitative method for histologic grading. , 1972, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[27]  C. Starmer,et al.  Indicator Transit Time Considered as a Gamma Variate , 1964, Circulation research.

[28]  C. Sheppard Mathematical considerations of indicator dilution techniques. , 1954, Minnesota medicine.