RESUMO
PURPOSE: Arterial spin labeling (ASL) is a widely used contrast-free MRI method for assessing cerebral blood flow (CBF). Despite the generally adopted ASL acquisition guidelines, there is still wide variability in ASL analysis. We explored this variability through the ISMRM-OSIPI ASL-MRI Challenge, aiming to establish best practices for more reproducible ASL analysis. METHODS: Eight teams analyzed the challenge data, which included a high-resolution T1-weighted anatomical image and 10 pseudo-continuous ASL datasets simulated using a digital reference object to generate ground-truth CBF values in normal and pathological states. We compared the accuracy of CBF quantification from each team's analysis to the ground truth across all voxels and within predefined brain regions. Reproducibility of CBF across analysis pipelines was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), limits of agreement (LOA), and replicability of generating similar CBF estimates from different processing approaches. RESULTS: Absolute errors in CBF estimates compared to ground-truth synthetic data ranged from 18.36 to 48.12 mL/100 g/min. Realistic motion incorporated into three datasets produced the largest absolute error and variability between teams, with the least agreement (ICC and LOA) with ground-truth results. Fifty percent of the submissions were replicated, and one produced three times larger CBF errors (46.59 mL/100 g/min) compared to submitted results. CONCLUSIONS: Variability in CBF measurements, influenced by differences in image processing, especially to compensate for motion, highlights the significance of standardizing ASL analysis workflows. We provide a recommendation for ASL processing based on top-performing approaches as a step toward ASL standardization.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Previously, multi- post-labeling delays (PLD) pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling (pCASL) protocols have been optimized for the estimation accuracy of the cerebral blood flow (CBF) with/without the arterial transit time (ATT) under a standard kinetic model and a normal ATT range. This study aims to examine the estimation errors of these protocols under the effects of macrovascular contamination, flow dispersion, and prolonged arrival times, all of which might differ substantially in elderly or pathological groups. METHODS: Simulated data for four protocols with varying degrees of arterial blood volume (aBV), flow dispersion, and ATTs were fitted with different kinetic models, both with and without explicit correction for macrovascular signal contamination (MVC), to obtain CBF and ATT estimates. Sensitivity to MVC was defined and calculated when aBV > 0.5%. A previously acquired dataset was retrospectively analyzed to compare with simulation. RESULTS: All protocols showed underestimation of CBF and ATT in the prolonged ATT range. With MVC, the protocol optimized for CBF only (CBFopt) had the lowest sensitivity value to MVC, 33.47% and 60.21% error per 1% aBV in simulation and in vivo, respectively, among multi-PLD protocols. All multi-PLD protocols showed a significant decrease in estimation error when an extended kinetic model was used. Increasing flow dispersion at short ATTs caused increasing CBF and ATT overestimation in all protocols. CONCLUSION: CBFopt was the least sensitive protocol to prolonged ATT and MVC for CBF estimation while maintaining reasonably good performance in estimating ATT. Explicitly including a macrovascular component in the kinetic model was shown to be a feasible approach in controlling for MVC.
