» Articles » PMID: 25516799

The Magnetic Susceptibility Effect of Gadolinium-based Contrast Agents on PRFS-based MR Thermometry During Thermal Interventions

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2014 Dec 18
PMID 25516799
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Proton resonance frequency shift (PRFS) magnetic resonance (MR) thermometry exploits the local magnetic field changes induced by the temperature dependence of the electron screening constant of water protons. Any other local magnetic field changes will therefore translate into incorrect temperature readings and need to be considered accordingly. Here, we investigated the susceptibility changes induced by the inflow and presence of a paramagnetic MR contrast agent and their implications on PRFS thermometry.

Methods: Phantom measurements were performed to demonstrate the effect of sudden gadopentetate dimeglumine (Gd-DTPA) inflow on the phase shift measured using a PRFS thermometry sequence on a clinical 3 T magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) system. By proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, the temperature dependence of the Gd-DTPA susceptibility was measured, as well as the effect of liposomal encapsulation and release on the bulk magnetic susceptibility of Gd-DTPA. In vivo studies were carried out to measure the temperature error induced in a rat hind leg muscle upon intravenous Gd-DTPA injection.

Results: The phantom study showed a significant phase shift inside the phantom of 0.6 ± 0.2 radians (mean ± standard deviation) upon Gd-DTPA injection (1.0 mM, clinically relevant amount). A Gd-DTPA-induced magnetic susceptibility shift of ΔχGd-DTPA = 0.109 ppm/mM was measured in a cylinder parallel to the main magnetic field at 37°C. The temperature dependence of the susceptibility shift showed dΔχGd-DTPA/dT = -0.00038 ± 0.00008 ppm/mM/°C. No additional susceptibility effect was measured upon Gd release from paramagnetic liposomes. In vivo, intravenous Gd-DTPA injection resulted in a perceived temperature change of 2.0°C ± 0.1°C at the center of the hind leg muscle.

Conclusions: The use of a paramagnetic MR contrast agent prior to MR-HIFU treatment may influence the accuracy of the PRFS MR thermometry. Depending on the treatment workflow, Gd-induced temperature errors ranging between -4°C and +3°C can be expected. Longer waiting time between contrast agent injection and treatment, as well as shortening the ablation duration by increasing the sonication power, will minimize the Gd influence. Compensation for the phase changes induced by the changing Gd presence is difficult as the magnetic field changes are arising nonlocally in the surroundings of the susceptibility change.

Citing Articles

Magnetic Resonance Thermometry of Focused Ultrasound Using a Preclinical Focused Ultrasound Robotic System at 3T.

Filippou A, Evripidou N, Georgiou A, Georgiou L, Chrysanthou A, Ioannides C J Med Phys. 2025; 49(4):583-596.

PMID: 39926130 PMC: 11801101. DOI: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_133_24.


Diffusion-weighted imaging as a potential non-gadolinium alternative for immediate assessing the hyperacute outcome of MRgFUS ablation for uterine fibroids.

Huang Y, Zhou S, Su Y, Pang Z, Cai S Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):9857.

PMID: 38684835 PMC: 11058248. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-60693-4.


A Non-Contrast Multi-Parametric MRI Biomarker for Assessment of MR-Guided Focused Ultrasound Thermal Therapies.

Johnson S, Zimmerman B, Odeen H, Shea J, Winkler N, Factor R IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2023; 71(1):355-366.

PMID: 37556341 PMC: 10768718. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2023.3303445.


Deep learning prediction of non-perfused volume without contrast agents during prostate ablation therapy.

Wright C, Makela P, Bigot A, Anttinen M, Bostrom P, Sequeiros R Biomed Eng Lett. 2023; 13(1):31-40.

PMID: 36711157 PMC: 9873841. DOI: 10.1007/s13534-022-00250-y.


Simultaneous proton resonance frequency T - MR shear wave elastography for MR-guided focused ultrasound multiparametric treatment monitoring.

Odeen H, Hofstetter L, Payne A, Guiraud L, Dumont E, Parker D Magn Reson Med. 2023; 89(6):2171-2185.

PMID: 36656135 PMC: 10940047. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.29587.


References
1.
Rieke V, Pauly K . MR thermometry. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008; 27(2):376-90. PMC: 2780364. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21265. View

2.
Cline H, Schenck J, Watkins R, Hynynen K, Jolesz F . Magnetic resonance-guided thermal surgery. Magn Reson Med. 1993; 30(1):98-106. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910300115. View

3.
Chu S, Xu Y, Balschi J, Springer Jr C . Bulk magnetic susceptibility shifts in NMR studies of compartmentalized samples: use of paramagnetic reagents. Magn Reson Med. 1990; 13(2):239-62. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910130207. View

4.
Peters N, Bartels L, Sprinkhuizen S, Vincken K, Bakker C . Do respiration and cardiac motion induce magnetic field fluctuations in the breast and are there implications for MR thermometry?. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009; 29(3):731-5. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21680. View

5.
De Poorter J . Noninvasive MRI thermometry with the proton resonance frequency method: study of susceptibility effects. Magn Reson Med. 1995; 34(3):359-67. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910340313. View