1naresh
Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) ) 1nareshArray ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) )Table 1:Comparison between the ssT1 and fpT2* methods: theoretical and practical considerations
ssT1 Method fpT2* Method Theoretical considerations Shape of contrast agent concentration time curve Bi-exponential decay Gamma-variate Concentration of intravascular contrast agent Lower Higher Ktrans for normal brain tissue Zero Negligible or very small, but not zero Rate of contrast agent movement from intravascular to extravascular space within a single voxel of tissue Slower Faster Practical considerations Spatial resolution Higher Lower Subjectivity to susceptibility artifact No Yes Imaging time Longer (>6 min) Shorter (<1.5 min) Postprocessing algorithm complexity Higher Lower