Which CEST technique provides most insight into tumors: 3T APTw, 3T CEST-MRF or 
7T multi-pool CEST?

Sedykh, M; Fabian, M; Herz, K; Perlman, O; Farrar, C; Mennecke, A; Schmidt, M; Dörfler, A; Zaiss, M

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Poster

Which CEST technique provides most insight into tumors: 3T APTw, 3T CEST-MRF or 7T multi-pool CEST?

MPS-Authors

/persons/resource/persons216025

Herz, K
Department High-Field Magnetic Resonance, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons214560

Zaiss, M
Department High-Field Magnetic Resonance, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

https://submissions.mirasmart.com/ISMRM2022/itinerary/ConferenceMatrixEventDetail.aspx?id=426
(Abstract)

Fulltext (restricted access)

There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.

Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Sedykh, M., Fabian, M., Herz, K., Perlman, O., Farrar, C., Mennecke, A., et al. (2022). Which CEST technique provides most insight into tumors: 3T APTw, 3T CEST-MRF or 7T multi-pool CEST?. Poster presented at Joint Annual Meeting ISMRM-ESMRMB & ISMRT 31st Annual Meeting (ISMRM 2022), London, UK.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000A-5DA1-8

Abstract

We report on only one glioblastoma patient, but who could be measured with several different CEST MRI methods: 3T APTw, 3T CEST fingerprinting, and 7T multi-pool CEST in order to reveal their relative performance and correlations. Coarse features can be observed in all methods, with MRF and 7T CEST being more versatile in non-active tumor parts. Isolation, separation and smarter combination of different CEST contrast is still needed to improve the diagnostic performance of CEST.