You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This was originally part of #268, but I wanted to get that merged ASAP, so I am happy to deal with this issue in a later PR. Basically, I need to decide between the Juttukonda 2021 unweighted average and the Dai 2012 weighted average for multi-PLD PCASL CBF calculation (or another approach entirely).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Manuel Taso provided some very useful advice recently. Namely, we should only use the weighted-delay approach when vascular crushing is enabled. When the scan doesn't have vascular crushing, this approach could cause CBF over-estimation.
Instead, Manuel recommends using a 2-3 compartment model (with an intravascular compartment), which can fit arterial bolus arrival time, transit time, and CBF all at once, as recommended in this preprint: https://osf.io/4tskr
tsalo
changed the title
Determine best way to combine CBF across delays
Replace weighted average with general kinetic model for multi-PLD data
Dec 15, 2023
tsalo
linked a pull request
Jan 3, 2024
that will
close
this issue
Summary
This was originally part of #268, but I wanted to get that merged ASAP, so I am happy to deal with this issue in a later PR. Basically, I need to decide between the Juttukonda 2021 unweighted average and the Dai 2012 weighted average for multi-PLD PCASL CBF calculation (or another approach entirely).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: