RESUMO
BACKGROUND: pH MRI may provide useful information to evaluate metabolic disruption following ischemia. Radiofrequency amplitude-based creatine chemical exchange saturation transfer (CrCEST) ratiometric MRI is pH-sensitive, which could but has not been explored to examine muscle ischemia. PURPOSE: To investigate skeletal muscle energy metabolism alterations with CrCEST ratiometric MRI. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. ANIMAL MODEL: Seven adult New Zealand rabbits with ipsilateral hindlimb muscle ischemia. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T/two MRI scans, including MRA and CEST imaging, were performed under two B1 amplitudes of 0.5 and 1.25 µT after 2 hours of hindlimb muscle ischemia and 1 hour of reperfusion recovery, respectively. ASSESSMENT: CEST effects of two energy metabolites of creatine and phosphocreatine (PCrCEST) were resolved with the multipool Lorentzian fitting approach. The pixel-wise CrCEST ratio was quantified by calculating the ratio of the resolved CrCEST peaks under a B1 amplitude of 1.25 µT to those under 0.5 µT in the entire muscle. STATISTICAL TESTS: One-way ANOVA and Pearson's correlation. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: MRA images confirmed the blood flow loss and restoration in the ischemic hindlimb at the ischemia and recovery phases, respectively. Ischemic muscles exhibited a significant decrease of PCr at the ischemia (under both B1 amplitudes) and recovery phases (under B1 amplitude of 0.5 µT) and significantly increased CrCEST from normal tissues at both phases (under both B1 levels). Specifically, CrCEST decreased, and PCrCEST increased with the CrCEST ratio. Significantly strong correlations were observed among the CrCEST ratio, and CrCEST and PCrCEST under both B1 levels (r > 0.80). DATA CONCLUSION: The CrCEST ratio altered substantially with muscle pathological states and was closely related to CEST effects of energy metabolites of Cr and PCr, suggesting that the pH-sensitive CrCEST ratiometric MRI is feasible to evaluate muscle injuries at the metabolic level. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1.