The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Quantification of Perfusion Using Bolus Tracking Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Stroke: Assumptions, Limitations, and Potential Implications for Clinical Use
Abstract
Background — MR techniques have been very powerful in providing indicators of tissue perfusion, particularly in studies of cerebral ischemia. There is considerable interest in performing absolute perfusion measurements, with the aim of improving the characterization of tissue “at risk” of stroke. However, some important caveats relating to absolute measurements need to be taken into account. The purpose of this article is to discuss some of the issues involved and the potential implications for absolute cerebral blood flow measurements in clinical use. Summary of Comment — In bolus tracking MRI, deconvolution of the concentration-time course can in theory provide accurate quantification. However, there are several important assumptions in the tracer kinetic model used, some of which may be invalid in cerebral ischemia. These can introduce significant errors in perfusion quantification. Conclusions — Although we believe that bolus tracking MRI is a powerful technique for the evaluation of perfusion in cerebral ischemia, interpretation of perfusion maps requires caution; this is particularly true when absolute quantification is attempted. Work is currently under way in a number of centers to address these problems, and with appropriate modeling they may be overcome in the future. In the interim, we believe that it is necessary for users of bolus tracking perfusion data to be aware of the current technical limitations if they are to avoid misinterpretation or overinterpretation of their findings.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Optimal Tmax Threshold for Predicting Penumbral Tissue in Acute Stroke
Olivot, J.-M., Mlynash, M., Thijs, V. N., Kemp, S., Lansberg, M. G., Wechsler, L., Bammer, R., Marks, M. P., & Albers, G. W. (2009) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.108.526954 · Cited by 401
Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Comprehensive Update on Principles and Techniques
Jahng, G.-H., Li, K.-L., Ostergaard, L., & Calamante, F. (2014) · Korean Journal of Radiology · doi:10.3348/kjr.2014.15.5.554 · Cited by 256
Self-citationLaw, M., Saindane, A. M., Ge, Y., Babb, J. S., Johnson, G., Mannon, L. J., Herbert, J., & Grossman, R. I. (2004) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2313030996 · Cited by 242
Rose, S. E., Janke, A. L., Strudwick, M. W., McMahon, K. L., Chalk, J. B., Snyder, P., & De zubicaray, G. I. (2006) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.20749 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Calamante, F., Gadian, D. G., & Connelly, A.
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2002-04
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1146-1151
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2146140938
- Cited by
- 283
- References
- 0
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantification of Perfusion Using Bolus Tracking Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Stroke: Assumptions, Limitations, and Potential Implications for Clinical Use. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.0000014208.05597.33
- The paper
- Calamante, F., Gadian, D. G., & Connelly, A. (2002). Quantification of Perfusion Using Bolus Tracking Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Stroke: Assumptions, Limitations, and Potential Implications for Clinical Use. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000014208.05597.33
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.