
AbstractPurposeNeurochemicals of interest quantified by MRS are often composites of overlapping signals. At higher field strengths (i.e., 7T), there is better separation of these signals. As the availability of higher field strengths is increasing, it is important to re‐evaluate the separability of overlapping metabolite signals.MethodsThis study compares the ability of stimulated echo acquisition mode (STEAM‐8; TE = 8 ms), short‐TE semi‐LASER (sLASER‐34; TE = 34 ms), and long‐TE semi‐LASER (sLASER‐105; TE = 105 ms) acquisitions to separate the commonly acquired neurochemicals at 7T (Glx, consisting of glutamate and glutamine; total N‐acetyl aspartate, consisting of N‐acetyl aspartate and N‐acetylaspartylglutamate; total creatine, consisting of creatine and phosphocreatine; and total choline, consisting of choline, phosphocholine, and glycerophosphocholine).ResultssLASER‐34 produced the lowest fit errors for most neurochemicals; however, STEAM‐8 had better within‐subject reproducibility and required fewer subjects to detect a change between groups. However, this is dependent on the neurochemical of interest.ConclusionWe recommend short‐TE STEAM for separation of most standard neurochemicals at 7T over short‐TE or long‐TE sLASER.
Male, Adult, Aspartic Acid, Spectroscopic Methodology, Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, Glutamine, Reproducibility of Results, Brain, Glutamic Acid, Creatine, Choline, Young Adult, Humans, Female, Algorithms
Male, Adult, Aspartic Acid, Spectroscopic Methodology, Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, Glutamine, Reproducibility of Results, Brain, Glutamic Acid, Creatine, Choline, Young Adult, Humans, Female, Algorithms
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
