Andrea Wijtenburg1, Jamie Near2, Stephanie Korenic1, Frank Gaston1, Hongji Chen1, Mark Mikkelsen3,4, Robert McMahon1, Peter Kochunov1, Elliot Hong1, and Laura Rowland1,5
1Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States, 2Centre d’Imagerie Cérébrale, Douglas Mental Health Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada, 3Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States, 4F. M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, United States, 5Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States
Synopsis
Cerebral glutathione
(GSH), a marker of oxidative stress processes, has been quantified in
neurodegenerative diseases and psychiatric disorders using proton magnetic
resonance spectroscopy. However, no studies to date have compared the
reproducibility of the most commonly used magnetic resonance spectroscopy techniques
for GSH quantification. Here, we scanned ten healthy
adults twice and acquired spectroscopic data using PRESS, PR-STEAM, SPECIAL,
and MEGA-PRESS at 3 Tesla. We assess reproducibility via mean coefficients of variation (CV) and mean absolute
difference (AD).
Target Audience
Researchers
interested in studying brain glutathione using MRS.Introduction
Using
proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy at 3 Tesla, brain glutathione (GSH), a
marker of oxidative stress, has been quantified in a multitude of
neurodegenerative diseases and psychiatric disorders. Historically, GSH has
been difficult to quantify due to the overlapping resonances of other
metabolites within the human brain such as myo-Inositol, creatine, glutamate,
glutamine, glucose, and GABA1. However, with the advent of improved
hardware, higher field strengths, and newly improved shimming and localization
techniques, quantification of cerebral glutathione has been possible.
Currently, the most commonly utilized MRS localization techniques to quantify
GSH are: PRESS, PR-STEAM, SPECIAL, and MEGA-PRESS; however, there have been no studies
conducted to compare reproducibility of these four techniques to quantify
glutathione using a within-subject design. Here, we assess reproducibility of
the 4 techniques to measure GSH in ten healthy adults, each scanned twice.
Phantom work was conducted to determine the validity of the quantification of
GSH.
Methods
All
studies were conducted on a 3T Siemens Magnetom TIM Trio 3T MR system with a
32-channel head coil. The study protocol was approved by the UMB IRB, and all
participants provided written informed consent. A 24-cm3 MRS voxel
was placed in the medial frontal lobe, which included the anterior cingulate
(Figure 1). Each of the 10 participants completed two MRS sessions with a short
break between sessions, during which the participant was removed from the
scanner. Automatic shimming was performed followed-up by manual adjustments if
needed. Each MRS session included a PRESS (TE=30ms, NEX=256, 16-step phase
cycle), MEGA-PRESS (TE=120ms, 128 ‘on’ and 128 ‘off’ acquisitions, editing pulse
bandwidth=62.7Hz, editing pulse frequency=4.56ppm), PR-STEAM (TM/TE=10/6.5ms,
NEX=256, RF phases: φ1=135°, φ2=22.5°,
φ13=112.5°, φADC=0°),
and SPECIAL (TE=8ms, NEX=256, 16-step phase cycle) localization technique
applied in a randomized order. The following parameters were identical for all
4 sequences: TR=2000 ms, spectral width = 2.5kHz, and 2048 complex points. A
water reference (NEX=16) was acquired with each of the 4 sequences for phase
and eddy current correction as well as quantification. PRESS, SPECIAL, and
PR-STEAM data were fit using LCModel2, and GSH levels with Cramer Rao Lower Bounds (CRLB) cutoff of less
than or equal to 20% were included in statistical analyses. For MEGA-PRESS,
data were analyzed using Gannet 3.03, and only GSH/Water ratios with
fit errors below 15%, similar to GABA, were used for further analyses. GSH
levels from all four sequences were corrected for the proportion of gray
matter, white matter, and CSF within the spectroscopic voxel using Matlab code
based directly from Gasparovic et al4. All GSH levels are reported
in institutional units. To test the accuracy of GSH quantification of each of
the 4 sequences, six phantoms were built with varying concentrations of GSH: 0
mM, 1 mM, 1.75 mM, 2.5 mM, 5 mM, and 10 mM. Each phantom also contained metabolites
with overlapping resonances at neurobiological concentrations. Reproducibility
between sessions was assessed via mean coefficients of variation (CVs in %), mean
absolute differences (ADs in %), and standard
error of measurement (SEM).Results
Representative
spectra acquired from each of the four sequences are shown in Figure 2. Data
from all the sequences were of excellent quality, and the CV of shim FWHM across
sequences was 0.60% with a range of 0-1.2% for session 1 and 0.73% with a range
of 0.33-1.68% for session 2. A one-sample Wilcoxon test revealed that the CVs
between sessions were not significantly different (p=0.441); thus, spectral
quality was consistent across sessions. All GSH data were included in
reproducibility analyses since all data were below goodness of fit thresholds. In
terms of mean CV, PR-STEAM had the lowest CV of 5.4% followed by PRESS at 7.0%,
SPECIAL at 8.0%, and finally MEGA-PRESS with a CV of 13.0%. For mean AD,
PR-STEAM had the lowest AD of 7.5% whereas SPECIAL and PRESS had nearly
identical mean AD of 10.1% and 10.2%, respectively. MEGA-PRESS had the highest
mean AD of 18.4%. SEM was lowest for PRESS followed by PR-STEAM, SPECIAL, and
MEGA-PRESS. Linear regressions between actual and detected GSH levels in phantoms
for all sequences were excellent at r2=0.983-999.Discussion
In
this study, we compared the reproducibility of four commonly used techniques to
quantify cerebral GSH in vivo. Of the four techniques, PR-STEAM had the lowest
mean CV and AD followed by PRESS, SPECIAL, MEGA-PRESS. The reproducibility
between PRESS and SPECIAL was comparable and only slightly higher than
PR-STEAM. MEGA-PRESS had the highest mean CV and AD as well as SEM. Phantom
studies showed that GSH quantification from the 4 techniques is valid. Overall, these data suggest that GSH can be reliably
quantified without the use of spectral editing.Acknowledgements
This
study was supported by the National Institute Health: R01MH094520References
1Govindaraju
V, Young K, Maudsley AA. Proton NMR chemical shifts and coupling constants for
brain metabolites. NMR Biomed 2000;13(3):129-153. 2Provencher SW.
Estimation of metabolite concentrations from localized in vivo proton NMR
spectra. Magn Reson Med 1993;30(6):672-679. 3Edden RA, Puts NA,
Harris AD, Barker PB, Evans CJ. Gannet: A batch-processing tool for the
quantitative analysis of gamma-aminobutyric acid-edited MR spectroscopy
spectra. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;40(6):1445-1452. 4Gasparovic C et al. Use of tissue water as a concentration reference for proton
spectroscopic imaging. Magn Reson Med 2006; 55(6): 1219-1226.