4.6 Article

Regional correlation between resting state FDG PET and pCASL perfusion MRI

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
Volume 33, Issue 12, Pages 1909-1914

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2013.147

Keywords

arterial spin labeling; ASL; glucose metabolism; PET

Funding

  1. NIH [R01-MH080892, R01-NS081077, R01-EB014922, P30-AG016570-11A, R03 DC010451]
  2. MdDS Balance Foundation Early Career Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To determine how arterial spin labeling (ASL) measured perfusion relates to baseline metabolism, we compared resting state cerebral perfusion using pseudo-continuous ASL and cerebral glucose metabolism using F-18-FDG PET in 20 normal volunteers. Greater regional metabolism relative to perfusion was observed in the putamen, orbitofrontal and temporal lobes, whereas perfusion was relatively higher in the hippocampus and insula. In a region of interest analysis limited to gray matter, the overall mean correlation between perfusion and metabolism across voxels was r=0.43 with considerable regional variability. Cross-voxel correlations between relative perfusion and metabolism in mean AR and PET images of all 20 subjects were the highest in the striatum (caudate: r=0.78; putamen: r=0.81), and the lowest in medial temporal structures (amygdala: r=0.087; hippocampus: r=0.26). Correlations between mean relative perfusion and metabolism across 20 subjects were the highest in the striatum (caudate: r=0.76; putamen: 0.58), temporal lobe (r=0.59), and frontal lobe (r=0.52), but very poor in all other structures (r<0.3), particularly in caudal structures such as the hippocampus (r=0.0026), amygdala (r=0.18), and insula (r=0.14). Although there was good overall correlation between perfusion and glucose metabolism, regional variability should be considered when using either ASL or F-18-FDG PET as surrogate markers for neural activity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available