Search

Background Impaired glucose metabolism is characteristic of several types of dementia, preceding cognitive symptoms and structural brain changes. Reduced glucose uptake in specific brain regions, detected using fluorine 18 ( 18 F) fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET, is a valuable diagnostic marker in Alzheimer disease (AD). However, the use of 18 F-FDG PET in clinical practice may be limited by equipment availability and high cost. Purpose To test the feasibility of using MRI-based deuterium ( 2 H) metabolic imaging (DMI) at a clinical magnetic field strength (3 T) to detect and localize changes in the concentration of glucose and its metabolites in the brains of patients with a clinical diagnosis of AD. Materials and Methods Participants were recruited for this prospective case-control pilot study between March 2021 and February 2023. DMI was performed at 3 T using a custom birdcage head coil following oral administration of deuterium-labeled glucose (0.75 g/kg). Unlocalized whole-brain MR spectroscopy (MRS) and three-dimensional MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) (voxel size, 3.2 cm cubic) were performed. Ratios of 2 H-glucose, 2 H-glutamate and 2 H-glutamine ( 2 H-Glx), and 2 H-lactate spectroscopic peak signals to 2 H-water peak signal were calculated for the whole-brain MR spectra and for individual MRSI voxels. Results A total of 19 participants, including 10 participants with AD (mean age, 68 years ± 5 [SD]; eight males) and nine cognitively healthy control participants (mean age, 70 years ± 6; six males) were evaluated. Whole-brain spectra demonstrated a reduced ratio of 2 H-Glx to 2 H-glucose peak signals in participants with AD compared with control participants (0.41 ± 0.09 vs 0.58 ± 0.20, respectively; P = .04), suggesting an impairment of oxidative glucose metabolism in AD. However, there was no evidence of localization of these changes to the expected regions of metabolic impairment at MRSI, presumably due to insufficient spatial resolution. Conclusion DMI at 3 T demonstrated impairment of oxidative glucose metabolism in the brains of patients with AD but no evidence of regional signal differences. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Objectives: The ischaemic core and penumbra volumes derived from CTP aid the selection of patients with an arterial occlusion for mechanical thrombectomy. Different post-processing software packages may give different CTP outputs, potentially causing variable patient selection for mechanical thrombectomy. The study aims were, firstly, to assess the correlation in CTP outputs from software packages provided by Brainomix and RapidAI. Secondly, the correlation between automated ASPECTS and neuroradiologist-derived ASPECTS and accuracy in detecting large vessel occlusion was assessed., Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included patients undergoing CTP for suspected anterior circulation large vessel occlusion. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used for testing the correlation in CTP outputs, ASPECTS/automated ASPECTS, and-in those with complete or near complete occlusion-final infarct volume. Diagnostic statistics were calculated for large vessel occlusion detection., Results: Correlation was high for ischaemic core and penumbra volumes (0.862 and 0.832, respectively) but lower for the mismatch ratio (0.477). Agreement in mechanical thrombectomy eligibility was achieved in 85% of cases (46/54). Correlation between ischaemic core and final infarct volume was higher for Brainomix (0.757) than for RapidAI (0.595). The correlation between ASPECTS and automated ASPECTS (0.738 and 0.659) and the accuracy of detecting large vessel occlusion (77% and 71%) was higher for Brainomix than for RapidAI., Conclusion: There was high correlation between the CTP output from Brainomix and RapidAI. However, there was a difference in MT eligibility in 15% of cases, which highlights that the decision regarding MT should not be based on imaging parameters alone., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)