Sultan Zaman Mahmud1,2, Thomas S. Denney1,2, and Adil Bashir1,2
1Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States, 2Auburn University MRI Research Center, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
Synopsis
Blood-brain
barrier (BBB) is crucial to prevent brain tissue from circulating toxins while
allowing the delivery of nutrients from intravascular space to the central
nervous system (CNS). Compromised BBB can result in brain dysfunction and degeneration.
Development of reproducible non-invasive techniques to assess BBB permeability
is of particular interest. Previously we had demonstrated a non-invasive technique
to estimate BBB permeability using magnetization transfer (MT) effect on
labeled arterial spins at 7T. In this work, we demonstrate the reproducibility
of the technique. The feasibility was evaluated in healthy subjects at baseline
and after caffeine challenge.
Introduction
Blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a tightly regulated biochemical
and anatomical system that supplies brain cells with nutrients, protects the
brain from harmful compounds and regulates ion balance 1,2.
It acts as a selective diffusion barrier and is compromised in pathological
conditions such as inflammatory disease, neoplasm etc. 3.
Previously, we demonstrated a non-invasive technique to assess BBB permeability
using magnetization transfer (MT) effect on ASL perfusion signal 4.
The technique relies on the fact that, when additional MT pulses are applied to
saturate brain macromolecules during ASL perfusion measurement, the vascular
water and tissue water experience very different MT effect. 5,6.
This allows us to quantify perfusion, water extraction fraction and
permeability surface area product in the brain. In this work, we demonstrate
the reproducibility of the developed technique. Furthermore we tested the
sensitivity of the technique to measure change in water extraction fraction and
perfusion due to caffeine intake.Methods
All the experiments were performed with Siemens 7T Magnetom
with 32 channel head coil. Using QUIPSS II FAIR ASL technique, perfusion (f in mL/100g/min),
water extraction fraction (E), permeability surface area product (PS in mL/100g/min)
and magnetization transfer ratio (MTR) were calculated as described previously 4.
Slice selective and non-selective inversions were achieved
with 8 ms hyperbolic secant adiabatic pulse. Other imaging parameters were:
FOV= 256 mm, slice thickness=8 mm, TR=2 s, TE=1.39 s, TI1=0.8 s, TI2=
1.8 s, flip angle=10o. Double saturation with pulse duration=2.56
ms was used to cut off the blood bolus
at TI1. MT pulse with offset frequency=500 Hz and duration=16.64 ms
was used to saturate the macromolecules. All the images were acquired in this
order: tag (MT on)/control (MT on)/tag (MT off)/control (MT off).
Test-retest reliability was determined in 4 subjects, who
were scanned twice on the same day. Caffeine challenge was performed in 3
subjects to validate the method. The participants were asked to refrain from
all kind of caffeine intake for 7 hours prior to the study and the studies were
performed approximately same time in the morning. After initial (pre-caffeine)
scans, subjects were removed from the scanner and given 200 mg caffeine pills.
Subjects were imaged again approximately 20 minutes after the caffeine intake.Results
Perfusion, water
extraction fraction, permeability surface area product and magnetization
transfer ratio maps are shown in Fig. 1. Bland-Altman plots for perfusion and
water extraction fraction (gray matter ROI) show very good agreement for test-retest
(Fig. 2a and 2b). Mean differences for perfusion and water extraction fraction
were 0.25 and -0.0025 respectively for the test-retest analysis. Perfusion (r =
0.85) and water extraction fraction (r = 0.9) were highly correlated in the
test-retest experiments (Fig. 2c and 2d). Fig. 3 shows the comparison of
perfusion, water extraction fraction and permeability surface area products
before and after caffeine intake. Perfusion was decreased from 77±5 to 59±3 mL/100g/min in gray
matter and 46±3 to 35±2 mL/100g/min in white matter following
caffeine intake (p=0.04). Extraction fraction was reduced from 0.91±0.02 to 0.89±0.01 in gray matter and
0.95±0.02 to 0.91±0.01 in white matter following caffeine
intake (p=0.02). Permeability surface area product also decreased from 189±11 to 130±5 mL/100g/min in gray
matter and 130±9 to 86±4 mL/100g/min in white matter following
caffeine intake (p=0.009).Discussion
In this study we have demonstrated the reproducibility of a
technique that utilizes magnetization transfer effect on perfusion signal to
assess BBB permeability. We also validated the result with caffeine challenge,
which is in good agreement with previous reports 7.
This technique can be very useful in investigating the BBB integrity in healthy
as well as pathological conditions and non-invasive nature will allow for
repeated studies. Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Hawkins
BT, Davis TP. The blood-brain barrier/neurovascular unit in health and disease.
Pharmacol Rev 2005;57(2):173-185.
2. Persidsky Y, Ramirez SH, Haorah J, et al. Blood-brain barrier: structural components and function under
physiologic and pathologic conditions. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol
2006;1(3):223-236.
3. Ballabh P, Braun A, Nedergaard M.
The blood-brain barrier: an overview: structure, regulation, and clinical
implications. Neurobiol Dis 2004;16(1):1-13.
4. Mahmud SZ, Denney TS, Bashir A.
Measurement of Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability in Human Brain using
Magnetization Transfer Effect at 7T. In Proceedings of 28th Annual
Meeting of ISMRM, 2020. p 1749.
5. Balaban RS, Ceckler TL.
Magnetization transfer contrast in magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Q
1992;8(2):116-137.
6. Dousset V, Degreze P, Mieze S, et al. Magnetization transfer on in vitro circulating
blood: Implications for time-of-flight MR angiography. Jmri-J Magn Reson Im
1995;5(6):786-788.
7. Wengler K, Bangiyev L, Canli T, et al. 3D MRI of whole-brain water permeability with
intrinsic diffusivity encoding of arterial labeled spin (IDEALS). Neuroimage
2019;189:401-414.