Synopsis
Although the BOLD signal has been the workhorse of
fMRI, BOLD fMRI is limited by its
intrinsic T2/T2* sensitivity and exhibits exaggerated weighting towards large
veins. Moreover, the BOLD signal is a relative rather than quantitative measure
of brain function that depends on the interplay of perfusion and oxygenation,
leaving room for ambiguous interpretation. This talk will summarize recent
efforts to explore alternative fMRI methods, including those based on blood
flow, blood volume and blood oxygenation. The applications of these methods in
both task-based and resting-state studies will be introduced.
Target Audience
Researchers and their trainees who are interested in
studying the physiological substrates of brain function using functional MRI
methods, and those who are interested in exploring emerging, non-conventional
fMRI methods.Learning Objectives
Attendees should expect to learn about the advantage and
main disadvantages of the BOLD technique, as well as the physical principles
behind various non-BOLD techniques that aim to more directly measure
physiological phenomena that give rise to the BOLD effect. Attendees will also
learn about the advantages and caveats of these methods that may boost or limit
their application in task-based as well as resting-state fMRI. Background & Methods
The
BOLD signal is a relative rather than quantitative measure of brain function
that depends on the interplay of perfusion and oxygenation, leaving room for
ambiguous interpretation. The predominant non-BOLD fMRI methods are based on
endogenous contrast generated through blood water 1, and was used in the first
CBF-based fMRI experiment 2.
Dynamic changes in CBF in response to vascular stimuli or functional tasks can
be derived from the time-series arterial-spin labeling (ASL) images without the
quantification step 3,4.
Though related to CBF, CBV offers unique diagnostic
information 5,
and dynamic CBV is particular useful for isolating vascular from metabolic
contributions to the BOLD fMRI signal 6. The well-known power-law
relationship first reported by Grubb et al 7 only relates CBF and CBV in their
static than dynamic states. To date, three approaches to non-invasive dynamic
CBV monitoring for fMRI have been introduced. The first, introduced by Lu et
al., attempts to isolate blood from tissue based on blood-tissue longitudinal
relaxation differences and has been termed vascular space occupancy (VASO) 8. This method has since been
extended for mapping quantitative CBV 9. Other methods, including MOTIVE 10 and VERVE 11, sought to isolate arterial and
venous CBV changes, respectively.
In terms of CMRO2 mapping, a wealth of research
has centred around calibrated BOLD fMRI 12,13.
The first instance of calibrated fMRI called for the use of hypercapnia. An
alternative calibration approach is through hyperoxia, assuming that O2
modulation does not induce vascular changes 14. However, both sets of assumptions
may not hold under all circumstances. Thus, both hypercapnia and hyperoxia have
been included in a comprehensive calibration model 15, with the advantage of relaxing the
assumptions of both earlier models. Alternatively, gas-free calibration has
also been proposed, based on the estimation of baseline tissue oxygenation via
T2 and T2* 16,17.
That is, T2’ is proportional to CMRO2 divided by CBF×CBV.
The major limitation, however, is that a calibration factor that relates the T2*
(hence T2’) value to the M value needs to be estimated, and this
calibration factor is sequence dependent.
One of the alternatives to calibrated fMRI is a technique
termed quantitative BOLD, or “qBOLD” 18, which has been proposed for OEF
estimation based on the interplay between T2 and T2*
decay. The main challenges in broadening qBOLD’s application is the need to fit
sometimes-noisy data to a multi-parametric model. Another novel approach,
“quantitative imaging of extraction of oxygen and tissue consumption (QUIXOTIC)
19,
uses venular-targeted velocity-selective spin labeling to isolate venous blood,
followed by rapid refocusing to induce T2 sensitivity in the venous
signal. The T2 is in turn related to venous oxygenation, which, in
combination with CBF measurements, can be used to derive voxel-wise
quantitative CMRO2. The main drawbacks of QUIXOTIC include the need
to select a cutoff flow velocity for targeting venular blood flow as well as
the long scan time.
Yet another alternative to calibrated fMRI is
susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI). The phase images generated by SWI can be
used to estimate OEF changes in response to stimuli or challenges 21. Quantitative susceptibility
mapping (QSM), which does not require gas challenges and is based on the linear
dependence of magnetic susceptibility on dHb concentration 22. QSM has been used to quantify
blood oxygenation in veins 23,24
and brain tissues 25.
More specifically, maps of task-induced CMRO2 and OEF changes can be
computed using QSM and ASL data 26. The main challenges facing QSM
include the need to solve an ill-posed inverse problem as well as the dependence
of QSM estimates on slice orientation.
In terms of connectivity mapping, the ability to robustly
capture spontaneous CBF fluctuations using ASL has opened up the enticing
possibility of mapping CBF-based resting-state FC. Thus far, efforts in this
direction have been successful, but have also raised issues in signal
preprocessing and interpretation. For instance, due to the relatively low
temporal resolution of ASL scans, perfusion time series from multiple subjects
are often concatenated. In addition, as CBF and BOLD provide complementary
information, it is appealing to combine ASL and BOLD for characterizing
spatiotemporal and quantitative properties of specific brain networks 27. Furthermore, joint CBF- and
BOLD-based connectivity analyses offer mutual validation of findings using each
modality, thereby improving confidence for statistical inferences. On the other
hand, cross-modality differences in connectivity maps also drive the search for
the neurovascular mechanisms underlying resting-state connectivity.Discussion
While a comprehensive view of brain physiology is critical
for understanding disease processes, every imaging technique discussed in this
talk is associated with specific assumptions. For instance, whether using BOLD
or perfusion-based fMRI methods, the measurement of neural response depends on
intact neurovascular coupling. Awareness
of these assumptions will be critical when interpreting data from patient
populations.Acknowledgements
Some of the presented work was supported by the Canadian
Institutes of Health Research. References
1. Kwong, K. K. et al. MR perfusion studies
with T1-weighted echo planar imaging. 34, 878–887 (1995).
2. Belliveau, J. W. et al. Functional mapping of
the human visual cortex by magnetic resonance imaging. Science 254, 716–719 (1991).
3. Buxton, R. B. et al. A general kinetic model
for quantitative perfusion imaging with arterial spin labelling. Magn.
Reson. Med. 40, 383–396 (1998).
4. Wong, E. C., Buxton, R.
B. & Frank, L. R. Implementation of quantitative perfusion imaging
techniques for functional brain mapping using pulsed arterial spin labeling. NMR
Biomed. 10, 237–249 (1997).
5. Siegal, T., Rubinstein,
R., Tzuk-Shina, T. & Gomori, J. M. Utility of relative cerebral blood
volume mapping derived from perfusion magnetic resonance imaging in the routine
follow up of brain tumors. J.
Neurosurg. 86, 22–27 (1997).
6. Hoge, R. D. Calibrated
fMRI. Neuroimage 62, 930–937 (2012).
7. Grubb, R. L., Phelps, M.
E. & Eichling, J. O. The effects of vascular changes in PaCO2 on cerebral
blood volume, blood flow and vascular mean transit time. Stroke 5, 630–639 (1974).
8. Lu, H., Golay, X., Pekar,
J. J. & Van Zijl, P. C. M. Functional magnetic resonance imaging based on
changes in vascular space occupancy. Magn.
Reson. Med. 50, 263–274 (2003).
9. Hua, J., Qin, Q., Pekar,
J. J. & van Zijl, P. C. M. Measurement of absolute arterial cerebral blood
volume in human brain without using a contrast agent. NMR
Biomed. 24, 1313–1325 (2011).
10. Kim, T. & Kim, S. G.
Quantification of cerebral arterial blood volume and cerebral blood flow using
MRI with modulation of tissue and vessel (MOTIVE) signals. Magn.
Reson. Med. 54, 333–342 (2005).
11. Stefanovic, B. &
Pike, G. B. Venous refocusing for volume estimation: VERVE functional magnetic
resonance imaging. Magn. Reson. Med. 53, 339–347 (2005).
12. Hoge, R. D. et al. Investigation
of BOLD Signal Dependence on CBF and CMRO: The Deoxyhemoglobin Dilution Model. (1999).
13. Davis, T. L., Kwong, K.
K., Weisskoff, R. M. & Rosen, B. R. Calibrated functional MRI: mapping the
dynamics of oxidative metabolism. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 1834–1839 (1998).
14. Chiarelli, P. A., Bulte,
D. P., Wise, R., Gallichan, D. & Jezzard, P. A calibration method for
quantitative BOLD fMRI based on hyperoxia. Neuroimage 37, 808–820 (2007).
15. Gauthier, C. J. &
Hoge, R. D. Magnetic resonance imaging of resting OEF and CMRO₂ using a
generalized calibration model for hypercapnia and hyperoxia. Neuroimage 60, 1212–1225 (2012).
16. Lu, H., Hutchison, J.,
Xu, F. & Rypma, B. The Relationship Between M in ‘Calibrated fMRI’ and the
Physiologic Modulators of fMRI. Open
Neuroimag. J. 5, 112–119 (2011).
17. Blockley, N. P.,
Griffeth, V. E. M., Simon, A. B., Dubowitz, D. J. & Buxton, R. B.
Calibrating the BOLD response without administering gases: comparison of
hypercapnia calibration with calibration using an asymmetric spin echo. Neuroimage 104, 423–429 (2015).
18. He, X., Zhu, M. &
Yablonskiy, D. A. Validation of oxygen extraction fraction measurement by qBOLD
technique. Magn. Reson. Med. 60, 882–888 (2008).
19. Bolar, D. S., Rosen, B.
R., Sorensen, A. G. & Adalsteinsson, E. QUantitative Imaging of eXtraction
of oxygen and TIssue consumption (QUIXOTIC) using venular-targeted
velocity-selective spin labeling. Magn.
Reson. Med. 66, 1550–1562 (2011).
20. Stout, J. N.,
Adalsteinsson, E., Rosen, B. R. & Bolar, D. S. Functional oxygen extraction
fraction (OEF) imaging with turbo gradient spin echo QUIXOTIC (Turbo QUIXOTIC).
Magn. Reson. Med. 79, 2713–2723 (2018).
21. Zaitsu, Y. et al. Mapping of cerebral
oxygen extraction fraction changes with susceptibility-weighted phase imaging. Radiology 261, 930–936 (2011).
22. Spees, W. M., Yablonskiy,
D. A., Oswood, M. C. & Ackerman, J. J. Water proton MR properties of human
blood at 1.5 Tesla: magnetic susceptibility, T1, T2, T2*, and non-Lorentzian
signal behavior. Magn. Reson. Med. 45, 533–542 (2001).
23. Haacke, E. M. et al. In Vivo Measurement of
Blood Oxygen Saturation Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Direct Validation
of the Blood Oxygen Level-Dependent Concept in Functional Brain Imaging. 5, 341–346 (1997).
24. Fan, A. P., Benner, T.,
Bolar, D. S., Rosen, B. R. & Adalsteinsson, E. Phase-based regional oxygen
metabolism (PROM) using MRI. Magn.
Reson. Med. 67, 669–678 (2012).
25. Zhang, J. et al. Cerebral metabolic rate
of oxygen (CMRO2 ) mapping with hyperventilation challenge using quantitative
susceptibility mapping (QSM). Magn.
Reson. Med. 77, 1762–1773 (2016).
26. Zhang, J. et al. Quantitative mapping of
cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO2) using quantitative susceptibility
mapping (QSM). Magn. Reson. Med. 74, 945–952 (2014).
27. Tak, S., Wang, D. J. J.,
Polimeni, J. R., Yan, L. & Chen, J. J. Dynamic and static contributions of
the cerebrovasculature to the resting-state BOLD signal. Neuroimage 84, 672–680 (2014).