Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains
The myelin concentration and the degree of myelination of nerve fibers can provide valuable information on the integrity of human brain tissue. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of myelin-sensitive parameters can help to non-invasively evaluate demyelinating diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS)....
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | NeuroImage |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811922008710 |
| _version_ | 1811178628662165504 |
|---|---|
| author | Ronja C. Berg Aurore Menegaux Thomas Amthor Guillaume Gilbert Maria Mora Sarah Schlaeger Viola Pongratz Markus Lauerer Christian Sorg Mariya Doneva Irene Vavasour Mark Mühlau Christine Preibisch |
| author_facet | Ronja C. Berg Aurore Menegaux Thomas Amthor Guillaume Gilbert Maria Mora Sarah Schlaeger Viola Pongratz Markus Lauerer Christian Sorg Mariya Doneva Irene Vavasour Mark Mühlau Christine Preibisch |
| author_sort | Ronja C. Berg |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The myelin concentration and the degree of myelination of nerve fibers can provide valuable information on the integrity of human brain tissue. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of myelin-sensitive parameters can help to non-invasively evaluate demyelinating diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS). Several different myelin-sensitive MRI methods have been proposed to determine measures of the degree of myelination, in particular the g-ratio. However, variability in underlying physical principles and different biological models influence measured myelin concentrations, and consequently g-ratio values. We therefore investigated similarities and differences between five different myelin-sensitive MRI measures and their effects on g-ratio mapping in the brains of both MS patients and healthy volunteers.We compared two different estimates of the myelin water fraction (MWF) as well as the inhomogeneous magnetization transfer ratio (ihMTR), magnetization transfer saturation (MTsat), and macromolecular tissue volume (MTV) in 13 patients with MS and 14 healthy controls. In combination with diffusion-weighted imaging, we derived g-ratio parameter maps for each of the five different myelin measures.The g-ratio values calculated from different myelin measures varied strongly, especially in MS lesions. While, compared to normal-appearing white matter, MTsat and one estimate of the MWF resulted in higher g-ratio values within lesions, ihMTR, MTV, and the second MWF estimate resulted in lower lesion g-ratio values.As myelin-sensitive measures provide rough estimates of myelin content rather than absolute myelin concentrations, resulting g-ratio values strongly depend on the utilized myelin measure and model used for g-ratio mapping. When comparing g-ratio values, it is, thus, important to utilize the same MRI methods and models or to consider methodological differences. Particular caution is necessary in pathological tissue such as MS lesions. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T06:21:47Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6098847af9c749db93cc61193d888459 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1095-9572 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T06:21:47Z |
| publishDate | 2022-12-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | NeuroImage |
| spelling | doaj.art-6098847af9c749db93cc61193d8884592022-12-22T04:40:32ZengElsevierNeuroImage1095-95722022-12-01264119750Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brainsRonja C. Berg0Aurore Menegaux1Thomas Amthor2Guillaume Gilbert3Maria Mora4Sarah Schlaeger5Viola Pongratz6Markus Lauerer7Christian Sorg8Mariya Doneva9Irene Vavasour10Mark Mühlau11Christine Preibisch12Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Munich, Germany; Corresponding author at: Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany.Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, TUM Neuroimaging Center, Munich, GermanyPhilips Research Europe, Hamburg, GermanyMR Clinical Science, Philips Healthcare, Mississauga, ON, CanadaTechnical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Munich, GermanyTechnical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Munich, GermanyTechnical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, TUM Neuroimaging Center, Munich, GermanyTechnical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, TUM Neuroimaging Center, Munich, GermanyTechnical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, TUM Neuroimaging Center, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Munich, GermanyPhilips Research Europe, Hamburg, GermanyUniversity of British Columbia, Department of Radiology, Vancouver, BC, CanadaTechnical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, TUM Neuroimaging Center, Munich, GermanyTechnical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Munich, Germany; Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, TUM Neuroimaging Center, Munich, GermanyThe myelin concentration and the degree of myelination of nerve fibers can provide valuable information on the integrity of human brain tissue. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of myelin-sensitive parameters can help to non-invasively evaluate demyelinating diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS). Several different myelin-sensitive MRI methods have been proposed to determine measures of the degree of myelination, in particular the g-ratio. However, variability in underlying physical principles and different biological models influence measured myelin concentrations, and consequently g-ratio values. We therefore investigated similarities and differences between five different myelin-sensitive MRI measures and their effects on g-ratio mapping in the brains of both MS patients and healthy volunteers.We compared two different estimates of the myelin water fraction (MWF) as well as the inhomogeneous magnetization transfer ratio (ihMTR), magnetization transfer saturation (MTsat), and macromolecular tissue volume (MTV) in 13 patients with MS and 14 healthy controls. In combination with diffusion-weighted imaging, we derived g-ratio parameter maps for each of the five different myelin measures.The g-ratio values calculated from different myelin measures varied strongly, especially in MS lesions. While, compared to normal-appearing white matter, MTsat and one estimate of the MWF resulted in higher g-ratio values within lesions, ihMTR, MTV, and the second MWF estimate resulted in lower lesion g-ratio values.As myelin-sensitive measures provide rough estimates of myelin content rather than absolute myelin concentrations, resulting g-ratio values strongly depend on the utilized myelin measure and model used for g-ratio mapping. When comparing g-ratio values, it is, thus, important to utilize the same MRI methods and models or to consider methodological differences. Particular caution is necessary in pathological tissue such as MS lesions.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811922008710Myelin imagingG-ratio mappingMyelin and axonal volume fractionsMultiple sclerosisWhite matter lesionsMagnetic resonance imaging |
| spellingShingle | Ronja C. Berg Aurore Menegaux Thomas Amthor Guillaume Gilbert Maria Mora Sarah Schlaeger Viola Pongratz Markus Lauerer Christian Sorg Mariya Doneva Irene Vavasour Mark Mühlau Christine Preibisch Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains NeuroImage Myelin imaging G-ratio mapping Myelin and axonal volume fractions Multiple sclerosis White matter lesions Magnetic resonance imaging |
| title | Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains |
| title_full | Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains |
| title_fullStr | Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains |
| title_short | Comparing myelin-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g-ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains |
| title_sort | comparing myelin sensitive magnetic resonance imaging measures and resulting g ratios in healthy and multiple sclerosis brains |
| topic | Myelin imaging G-ratio mapping Myelin and axonal volume fractions Multiple sclerosis White matter lesions Magnetic resonance imaging |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811922008710 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ronjacberg comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT auroremenegaux comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT thomasamthor comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT guillaumegilbert comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT mariamora comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT sarahschlaeger comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT violapongratz comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT markuslauerer comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT christiansorg comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT mariyadoneva comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT irenevavasour comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT markmuhlau comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains AT christinepreibisch comparingmyelinsensitivemagneticresonanceimagingmeasuresandresultinggratiosinhealthyandmultiplesclerosisbrains |