↓ Skip to main content

Comparative study of pulsed-continuous arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility contrast imaging by histogram analysis in evaluation of glial tumors

Overview of attention for article published in Neuroradiology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Comparative study of pulsed-continuous arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility contrast imaging by histogram analysis in evaluation of glial tumors
Published in
Neuroradiology, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00234-018-2024-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Atsuko Arisawa, Yoshiyuki Watanabe, Hisashi Tanaka, Hiroto Takahashi, Chisato Matsuo, Takuya Fujiwara, Masahiro Fujiwara, Yasunori Fujimoto, Noriyuki Tomiyama

Abstract

Arterial spin labeling (ASL) is a non-invasive perfusion technique that may be an alternative to dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging (DSC-MRI) for assessment of brain tumors. To our knowledge, there have been no reports on histogram analysis of ASL. The purpose of this study was to determine whether ASL is comparable with DSC-MRI in terms of differentiating high-grade and low-grade gliomas by evaluating the histogram analysis of cerebral blood flow (CBF) in the entire tumor. Thirty-four patients with pathologically proven glioma underwent ASL and DSC-MRI. High-signal areas on contrast-enhanced T1-weighted images or high-intensity areas on fluid-attenuated inversion recovery images were designated as the volumes of interest (VOIs). ASL-CBF, DSC-CBF, and DSC-cerebral blood volume maps were constructed and co-registered to the VOI. Perfusion histogram analyses of the whole VOI and statistical analyses were performed to compare the ASL and DSC images. There was no significant difference in the mean values for any of the histogram metrics in both of the low-grade gliomas (n = 15) and the high-grade gliomas (n = 19). Strong correlations were seen in the 75th percentile, mean, median, and standard deviation values between the ASL and DSC images. The area under the curve values tended to be greater for the DSC images than for the ASL images. DSC-MRI is superior to ASL for distinguishing high-grade from low-grade glioma. ASL could be an alternative evaluation method when DSC-MRI cannot be used, e.g., in patients with renal failure, those in whom repeated examination is required, and in children.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 5 42%
Student > Master 3 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 6 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 17%
Mathematics 1 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Other 1 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2018.
All research outputs
#10,336,307
of 12,953,232 outputs
Outputs from Neuroradiology
#396
of 633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,812
of 268,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuroradiology
#7
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,953,232 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 633 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,846 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.