Synopsis
Relaxometry
measurements were performed on umbilical cord blood samples (N=88)
spanning a broad range of hematocrits (0.19<Hct<0.76)
and oxygen saturations (4%<sO2<100%).
Simple biophysical models were used to describe variations in T1
and T2 as a function of these blood properties. The
data and fitted model parameters presented here can be used for
calibration of future MRI investigations of fetal and neonatal blood
physiology. Introduction
Feasibility of
relaxometry measurements in human fetal vessels using
magnetization-prepared, motion-corrected, fast imaging techniques has
recently been demonstrated [1,2]. Due to a magnetic susceptibility
difference between oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin, blood
T1 and
T2
relaxation times are sensitive to the oxygen saturation,
sO2, and
hematocrit,
Hct [3]. Therefore, with the help of an appropriate
calibration, fetal vessel relaxometry can be used for non-invasive
quantification of these properties, which would of great value in the
diagnosis and management of fetal hypoxia. However, due to differences between adult and fetal blood (e.g. different
hemoglobin structure, 20% larger erythrocytes, 20% reduced plasma
viscosity) [4], existing, adult blood derived calibrations may not be applicable to fetal
blood. Accordingly, the objective of this investigation was to
characterize the relationships between fetal blood relaxation times
and the oxygen saturation and hematocrit. Relaxometry measurements
were performed at 1.5T on umbilical cord blood samples harvested from
human caesarean deliveries.
Methods
Sample Collection & Preparation:
Umbilical cord blood
was harvested from 6 placentas following caesarean delivery at >37
weeks' gestation. The 30-50mL volume of blood obtained from each
collection was divided into multiple 1-2mL samples, which
were processed (by removal/addition of separated plasma and exposure
to nitrogen gas) to provide a range of Hct and sO2. In total, 88 samples (6
collections x ~15 samples/collection) were studied.
MRI Acquisition:
Samples were scanned
at 37°C
(using a heated water bath) on a 1.5T Avanto Syngo system (Siemens
Healthcare). T2 relaxation times were measured using a multi-echo
spin echo pulse sequence with 32 echoes and
6 different echo
spacings, τ180=6.7,
12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 ms. T1 was measured using a Modified Look
Locker Inversion Recovery (MOLLI) pulse sequence with 15
inversion times, TI, from 50-5300 ms [5]. Blood
samples were manually agitated prior to each scan and scan durations
did not exceed 3 minutes.
Immediately
following MRI, sample Hct and sO2 was measured using an ABL-800 FLEX
Blood Gas Analyzer. Sample
manipulations resulted in a range of 0.19-0.76 for Hct and 4-100% for
sO2. Two plasma (i.e.
Hct=0) samples were
also included.
Data Processing:
T2
was estimated from a mono-exponential fit of the mean spin-echo signal
in manually drawn ROIs
within each sample tube.
T1
was evaluated
by fitting the ROI
signal vs.
TI to
the
exponential: A+B·exp(-TI/T1*).
The
apparent relaxation time, T1*,
was then used to compute the “corrected” T1:T1=T1*(B/A-1).
R1=T1-1
data was fit to the relationship: R1= Hct·R1,ery + (1-Hct)·R1,plas, where R1,ery and R1,plas are the erythocyte and plasma relaxation rates [6]. R1,ery is dependent on sO2: R1,ery=R1,ery,0+r'dHb·(1-sO2/100). A fit to R1 data yields estimates of paramaters R1,ery,0, R1,plas, and r'dHb.
R2=T2-1
data was fit to the Luz-Meiboom two-site (plasma and erythrocytes)
exchange model for blood [3,7], which
has 6
parameters: R2,plas,
R2,dia+R2,oxy, R2,deo-R2,oxy, τ, ωdia+ωoxy, and ωdeo-ωoxy. The
first three parameters include the relaxation rates of plasma (R2,plas),
deoxyhemoglobin (R2,deo), oxyhemoglobin (R2,oxy), and other
diamagnetic intracellular components (R2,dia). The fourth parameter, τ, is the erythrocyte-plasma exchange correlation time. The final two
parameters relate to the frequency shifts for oxyhemoglobin (ωoxy), deoxyhemoglobin (ωdeoxy), and residual diamagnetic sites (ωdia).
Results & Discussion
T1
and T2 data (τ180=6.7
ms)
for all cord blood samples are plotted in Figure 1 and 2, respectively.
Relationships
between relaxation
times and blood properties are apparent: both
T1
and
T2 decreased
with Hct and increased
with sO2. However,
T1 was primarily affected by Hct, while T2 exhibited a larger
dependence on sO2.
T1 and T2 data along with the model fits is shown in Figures
3 and
4.
Fitted
model parameters are summarized in Table 1.
Variations
in relaxation time with blood properties were effectively explained
by the models.
Figure
5 shows plots, for each τ180, of T2 data for samples with 0.4<Hct<0.6
(the normal Hct range). Also plotted is a calibration equation of
the form R2=R2,0+K0(1-sO2/100)+K1(1-sO2/100)2,
which
can be employed to calculate sO2 from a fetal vascular T2
measurement. Coefficients
R2,0, K0, and K1 were calculated using the fitted Luz-Meiboom model parameters.
Conclusion
Simple biophysical models previously developed for adult blood were used to describe relaxation times in cord blood as a function of Hct and sO2. MRI properties of cord blood are appropriate to describe late-gestation fetal (>35 weeks) and neonatal (<1 month old) blood. The data and fitted model parameters we report can thus be used for the interpretation of future MRI investigations of fetal and neonatal blood physiology.
As
the first characterization of fetal blood relaxometry
at
1.5T,
this
work
represents a key step in adaptation of non-invasive vascular oximetry
techniques towards a
fetal
population.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the donors, the RCWIH BioBank, the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, and the Mount Sinai Hospital/University Health Network Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology for the human specimens used in this study (http://biobank.lunenfeld.ca). Thanks also to Natasha Milligan, Clinical Research Associate, for facilitating REB approval and performing patient recruitment. This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (funding reference number MOP130403).References
[1] Sun, L., Macgowan, C.K., Sled, J.G., et al. Circulation 2015; 131:1313-1323.
[2] Zhu, M.Y., Milligan, N., Keating, S., et al. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2015; doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.10.004.
[3] van Zijl, P.C., Eleff, S.M., Ulatowski J.A., et al. Nature Medicine 1998; 4:159-167.
[4] Polin, R., Fox, W., and Abman, S. Fetal and Neonatal Physiology: Expert Consult. Elsevier/Saunders. 2011.
[5] Messroghli, D.R., Radjenovic, A., Kozerke, S., et al. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2004; 52:141-146.
[6] Li, W., Grgac, K., Huang, A., Yadav, N., et al. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2015; doi:10.1002/mrm.25875.
[7] Luz, Z., and Meiboom, S. The Journal of Chemical Physics 1963; 39:366.