Medical College of Wisconsin
CTSICores SearchResearch InformaticsREDCap

Comparison of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR methods: recommendations for measuring relative cerebral blood volume in brain tumors. Radiology 2008 Nov;249(2):601-13



Pubmed ID


Pubmed Central ID




Scopus ID

2-s2.0-56149097774   247 Citations


PURPOSE: To investigate whether estimates of relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) in brain tumors, obtained by using dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging vary with choice of data acquisition and postprocessing methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four acquisition methods were used to collect data in 22 high-grade glioma patients, with informed written consent under HIPAA-compliant guidelines approved by the institutional review board. During bolus administration of a standard single dose of gadolinium-based contrast agent (0.1 mmol per kilogram of body weight), one of three acquisition methods was used: gradient-echo (GRE) echo-planar imaging (echo time [TE], 30 msec; flip angle, 90 degrees ; n = 10), small-flip-angle GRE echo-planar imaging (TE, 54 msec; flip angle, 35 degrees ; n = 7), or dual-echo GRE spiral-out imaging (TE, 3.3 and 30 msec; flip angle, 72 degrees ; n = 5). Next, GRE echo-planar imaging (TE, 30 msec; flip angle, 90 degrees ; n = 22) was used to collect data during administration of a second dose of contrast agent (0.2 mmol/kg). Subsequently, six methods of analysis were used to calculate rCBV. Mean rCBV values from whole tumor, tumor hot spots, and contralateral brain were normalized to mean rCBV in normal-appearing white matter.

RESULTS: Friedman two-way analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance results indicated that qualitative rCBV values were dependent on acquisition and postprocessing methods for both tumor and contralateral brain. By using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney test, a consistently positive (greater than zero) tumor-contralateral brain rCBV ratio resulted when either the preload-postprocessing correction approach or dual-echo acquisition approach (P < .008 for both methods) was used.

CONCLUSION: The dependence of tumor rCBV on the choice of acquisition and postprocessing methods is caused by their varying sensitivities to T1 and T2 and/or T2* leakage effects. The preload-correction approach and dual-echo acquisition approach are the most robust choices for the evaluation of brain tumors when the possibility of contrast agent extravasation exists.

Author List

Paulson ES, Schmainda KM


Eric Paulson PhD Associate Professor in the Radiation Oncology department at Medical College of Wisconsin
Kathleen M. Schmainda PhD Professor in the Biophysics department at Medical College of Wisconsin

MESH terms used to index this publication - Major topics in bold

Analysis of Variance
Blood Volume
Brain Neoplasms
Cerebrovascular Circulation
Contrast Media
Gadolinium DTPA
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Middle Aged
Statistics, Nonparametric